“There’s always been a struggle between art and commerce — and now, I’m telling you, art is getting its ass kicked. And it’s making us mean; and it’s making us bitchy.” ~ Judd Hirsch as Wes Mendell, Pilot episode of “Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip” (via Aaron Sorkin)

Yesterday, Grace presented a thought-provoking post on the current state (and future possibilities) of SL from a practical business standpoint. Part of it was a revisit to her previous post which narrowed down the market the Linden Lab “powers that be” could be aiming for through process of elimination. So far, Grace’s tea leaves are dead-on (mostly because she is less educated guesser and more professional-that-knows-her-stuff than the average blogger).

The bigger question, for me, is: what form will this impending (and necessary) “destruction” and restructuring take? Targeted wetwork or napalm? I can think of three historically tried methods for such endeavors:

Model One : And the Lord Spoke Unto
And your children shall be shepherds in the wilderness for forty years and shall suffer for your faithlessness, until the last of your dead bodies lies in the wilderness. ~ Numbers 14:33
Central Message: “Fuck All Of You.”
Probability: Low
Chance of Success: Risky
Prior Example: God and the Israelites

Linden Lab has the potential to go Old Testament on us. Let’s face it, they’ve got the keys to the kingdom (anyone who works with LSL should have no problem believing the world was created in six days or less) and they can lock us out of the car at any time. They could easily just decide to ignore the entire existing customer base, and refocus their offered content, and policies on all-new users. While it may seem like this is what they’re already doing, it’s not — it just seems that way because they keep changing their targets. Such drastic measures could net them a lower-maintenance user base. However it also means they lose the user-created content boon that comes along with those pesky talented haughty pain in the ass artist types. Even Lindens are able to see the difference between their avatars and the average user’s avatar. Unless they’re willing to hire high-dollar content artists (recent employment shifts at the Lab don’t point this way) they’re stuck hoping their user base can produce content that will woo new blood. Also they don’t have forty years, or whatever the digital age equivalent is.

Model Two : No, Mister Bond, I Expect You To Die
You spin me right round, baby, right round, in a manner depriving me of an inertial reference frame. Baby. ~ XKCD
Central Message: “Cream Will Rise.”
Probability: Moderate
Chance of Success: Variable
Prior Example: Babcock Centrifuge

Shake things up, give us a spin cycle, and hope the momentum separates the wheat from the chaff. It sounds like madness, but there’s some method to this type of approach. First of all, if you do it with economy, the people on the fringes (who are less likely to be desirable users from a business perspective) will flake off. This gets rid of users that don’t directly contribute to the in-world economy and the hobbyist creator who plugs the gird with low-level junk. What remains is the big spenders, the big earners, and the people with absolutely no quality of experience expectations who will put up with anything (interestingly, both cream and scum rise to the top). The costs to the community take the form of those individuals who contribute intangible value to an environment; from an “on paper” point of view, that’s often a loss companies are willing to take.

Model Three : The Jedi Mind Trick
“These aren’t the droids you’re looking for.” ~ Obi-Wan (via George Lucas) Star Wars: Episode IV – A New Hope
Central Message: “You’ll Like What We Tell You To Like.”
Probability: Worrisome
Chance of Success: Even More Worrisome
Prior Example: Apple, Disney, Blizzard

In many ways, Linden Lab has always flirted with this model, cherry picking what it wanted to present to the community as “the right things.” However, this has been done passively, with a focus on positive voice rather than targeted content. While the validity and ethics of this method is murky, there’s no question that LL has skilled up on PR over the last several months. The website looks and navigates professionally; newsletters are polished and purposeful; regardless of the chaos and ill decisions, the announcements are mostly on-target message-wise. (It’s sad that these are improvements for a seven year old company now that I think of it, but let’s ignore that for now.) By identifying the superficial things that draw in higher volumes of casual users and escalating the prices of things that problem users value, there’s a big two birds one stone benefit in this method from a CEO POV. But this will have to be done with finesse so that too many are not alienated too fast and they don’t end up with all their eggs in one bunny…erm, I mean basket.

Art vs Commerce

While I do roll my eyes an awful lot over the-sky-is-falling circle, I have some sympathy. Linden Lab marketed itself, for years, under an idealistic banner of hearts, flowers, and rainbow-colored unicorns. LL slogans were pledges of cooperation with their user base; their medicine man made high profile claims and promises to the community of the wondrous things to come. It’s a lie to claim this was merely clever advertising; Linden Lab simply isn’t that clever. There were promises of good faith made to the user base from the company in both its early collective actions and aloud in the person of its Willy Wonka leader. Yes, those promises purchased huge quantities of goodwill and good press. But they were never practical and the user base, being mostly composed of adults who live in the very real world, should have known better. I understand and acknowledge my own disappointment and disillusionment of how far below the high water mark Linden Lab has settled, but such sentiments are the result of self-inducted suspense of disbelief, no matter how enabled by Linden Lab and its jester/king/whatever he is this week.

Yes, when you tear down a house to rebuild a new one, you lose the things that made the previous structure feel like a home to its inhabitants. It’s a painful process, but so is an unhealthy devotion to trying to squat in a condemned structure that’s threatening to collapse around you. If there is to be a reinvention, it must succeed in not only knocking down the walls of Linden Lab incompetence, but also the entitlement and unreasonable expectations of segments of the user base.

At any rate, given that most useful content in Second Life is almost entirely user-base driven, what does this mean?

History and literature are packed with instances of artists coming to terms with maintaining focus amid the distractions of the battle against power and commerce. Michelangelo, Beethoven, Henry Miller, Banksy all share(d) issues with authority and scorn toward the patron/business aspect of art culture while simultaneously having to woo favor to survive and maintain the tools of their trade. But artists have to face the hard truth, that most people don’t know or appreciate a quality experience of artistic expression when they encounter it. People will want what they want unless someone convinces them differently. Commerce does that better than artists. Always has, always will.

Real art does not owe commerce anything, but an equally important truth that often gets overlooked is that if art has no obligation to commerce, then commerce, in turn, has no obligation to art. It is only where their motives intersect that mutuality occurs. I’ve known a lot of artists and I’ve known a lot of businesspeople; I’ve regarded myself as both and neither, but mostly I’ve come to the conclusion that there isn’t a lot of difference between the nature of the two beasts. Creating art is a self-absorbed, ruthless and committed undertaking; so is the business of making money.

Unlike a lot of the SL “community” I don’t labor under the delusion that Linden Lab owes artists anything. I don’t even think Linden Lab necessarily owes its “community” anything more than consistency and a reliable product. The problem I have is that Linden Lab keeps falling on its face and dragging everyone down with them. They’ve taken a product with limitless potential and turned it into mediocrity. This offends me on a fundamental logic level, like the characters of Less Than Zero or the Kardashians.

But, Wait, There’s Hope

Commerce, art, and recreation all have intersecting bubbles in their Venn diagrams. That overlap has so much potential it’s almost unfathomable that in seven years, Linden Lab has been unable to get it together. Think about that length of time. If a team doesn’t make it to the playoffs in seven years, ticket sales sink; vendors find alternate sources of income, free agents jump ship. The fact that we’re even still here, still giving them a chance has to underscore the potential of the possibilities.

Second Life is a platform. It’s a tool. It’s a canvas. It’s a playground. Linden Lab is a company with one high profile product that is on the edges of becoming the biggest almost-that-never-was; a cautionary tale of squandered opportunity. The danger of losing an important stage in the evolution toward the inevitable emergence of virtuality is playing out and while it’s morbidly fascinating to watch, there is a fourth model that could stem some of the damage and growing pains.

The Fourth Model: Diplomacy and Recognition of Mutual Advantage
Central Message: “Let’s Talk.” / “You Scratch My Back, I’ll Scratch Yours.”
Probability: Unknown
Chance of Success: Hopeful
Prior Example: All around us, everyday.

This doesn’t have to be about art vs commerce; paper dolls vs gadgets; us vs them.

This transition is about a platform completely dependent upon its user base while simultaneously shutting out its user base. It’s about a user base so busy screaming about what they’re entitled to and what they felt they were promised that they’re losing sight of what is still to be employed and gained.

There have to be ways for us — the artists, the coders, the content creators, the fashionistas, the entertainers, and even the casual users — to open means of communication. Linden Lab either can’t or won’t invite us to the table. We’re going to have to find ways to engage them on a practical business level, to demonstrate that motivating our involvement will contribute positively to their bottom line.

So, our homework is to figure out what we contribute that they need and how to communicate our willingness to compromise what we want in terms so simple as to compel their assent. We need the right people with the right ideas to make the right proposals to the right ears.

Or we can just sit back, wait it out, and see which way the wind blows while we shepherd bunnies for forty years on the mainland.

“The greatest barrier to success is the fear of failure.” ~ Sven Goran Eriksson

Innocently reading over and trying to play catch-up on my tweets now that I’m feeling better and I spot one that makes me do a “oh, you’ve got to be kidding.” Only it wasn’t.

Linden Lab official discussion guidelines. Read the full policies here.

The part that makes me bang my head on the desk?

Second Paragraph of the “No Advertising or Commercial Promotion” Subsection:
We expressly prohibit posts that enable, encourage, or instruct others to leave Second Life, the Xstreet SL marketplace, or any Linden Lab property so that they can sell, buy, or trade on non-Linden Lab websites, virtual worlds, or online services that include the sale or trade of products or services. Included in this prohibition are posts promoting or advertising to buy, sell, or trade outside a Linden Lab property (such as Second Life or the Xstreet SL marketplace), and posts linking to websites that include offers to trade, sell, or purchase outside a Linden Lab property.

(emphasis mine)

Contrast this against:

Opening paragraph:
The Second Life blogs and forums are here for you, the Residents of Second Life, to discuss your ideas, questions, and projects and to share what you’ve learned about Second Life with each other and with us. We believe in an honest and open free exchange of ideas, and in always maintaining a courteous respect for the opinions and positions of others. We believe that promoting a respectful discourse and sharing of ideas leads to a stronger, better informed community.

So, in other words, Linden Lab believes that the honest and open exchange of ideas leads to a stronger, better informed community so long as there is no mention of competing products or suggestions for third party options. How, exactly, under these guidelines, would a person compare and contrast the benefits of the SL Marketplace vs. an alternate marketplace? How could someone offer a suggestion for an improvement based on something a competitor is already doing?

Once you are afraid of being held to the light of your competition, you are conceding that you are inferior. Imagine, for example, if the official WOW forums didn’t permit discussion of how their PVP system matched up against Aion. Those who are secure in their product have no fear of their competitors being discussed. The position should be “yes, go compare as you should — we are confident you’ll return and find our product to be the better option.” THAT is the position of a company confident in their product and the service they are offering their user base.

You can have anti-spam guidelines that don’t include censorship clauses. Hiding behind anti-spam to promote censorship and product isolationism is lazy. Being comfortable enough with this that you choose to use the word “prohibition” in your actual policy staggers my mind.

Years ago I made a comment about Linden Lab and how they always seem to be playing prevent defense before they’ve bothered to score. It looks like that’s gone from an amusing perception to a business philosophy. Will someone please step up, grow a pair, and save these people from themselves?

Hat Tip: Grace

“Courage is fire, and bullying is smoke.” ~ Benjamin Disraeli

I am still sick. On the mend, happily, but I haven’t really be able to log in for a little over a week. Thankfully, my offline IMs are largely full, because what’s there is a lot of fluttering about this person calling that person this thing and this other thing. Having learned the hard way that controversy generates attention and traffic, I understand why this predominates virtual world behavior. True, an ugly part of me understands the popcorn entertainment value of it, but that’s the ugly part of myself and I know she’s wrong.

In face-to-face interaction getting attention by any means has negative consequences. For one thing, you have a limited number of responders. Behaving out of character in most small company situations will generally have an adverse affect effect which only benefits the “all attention is good attention” types. But in cyberspace, you can type whatever you like and, odds are, someone somewhere will eventually agree with you. This creates a validation loop that pushes the borders of good behavior away from the cost/benefit ratio of most social norms. As such, people lose sight of realistic behavior and can degenerate into caricatures. This is where a commitment to common courtesy, an adherence to personal ethics, and the ability to self-critique come in handy.

No one is perfect. We all slip now and then. More important than trying to be perfect, however, is the recognition of the slip. When you begin to validate your own engagement of negative behavior, you’re on the wrong side of the equation.

I have an ongoing debate with one of my closest confidants who maintains there is no way to influence the behavior of others and so negative behavior exhibited by peers, associates, agitants, or nearby strangers is merely to be endured or ignored. I understand the stance; it’s just not how I was raised. In physical world interaction there are cues we give to demonstrate disapproval. Frowns. Distancing body language. Sighs. When overused, these are passive-aggressive monikers, but far more often these are the indicators that signal when someone is behaving outside tribal norms to help them self-check. Yes, there are times when it is necessary, even brave, to buck those norms. However, that courage is meaningless if the iconoclast is unaware of the lines they are crossing.

There is no courage in lambasting weak individuals and playing pile-on atop the corpse of a horse that’s been flogged to death. There is no courage in anonymous assault. There is no courage in personal attack for the sake of personal attack. There is no courage in manifestos. There is no courage in taking pride in ignorance. There is no courage in rudeness for rudeness sake. Those who try to excuse their bad behavior in the name of “courage” are, mostly just insecure, arrogant children attempting to self-validate. As such, those people should be regarded as children and not elevated by others who should, frankly, know better.

Courage is blogging the truth when the country you live in might very well imprison or kill you for it. Courage is standing up to a mob of anger and fear and calling that anger and fear for what it is. With very few exceptions, courage simply isn’t going to be found by blogging about some person who called you a name or who said they didn’t like your lifestyle. I doubt that there is any real courage to be found in playing virtual paper dolls, but if there is, I call dibs. All joking aside, a little perspective goes a long way in this particular case.

There are bullies in the world, to be certain. But a bully has to have power over you that is beyond your control. The kid who pushes you down because he’s bigger and stronger is a bully. The boss who humiliates you because she knows you need your job is a bully. The make-believe person typing on their vanity blog is not a bully unless you allow them to be one. Calling them one means you are doing two things. First, you are declaring they have power over you. Second, you are establishing yourself as vulnerable to them. Exposing your throat to an individual that destroys happily as a manner matter of course is self-defeating and stupid. Calling them a bully does nothing but try to establish that they have power over you; it makes you a victim of your own insecurity. This is especially true when the game turns into “I know you are, but what am I?”

Unlike my friend, I don’t believe in greeting bad behavior with indifference. At the same time, it is not my place to tell anyone else how to behave. What I can do is demonstrate what is acceptable by my understanding of acceptable and give those who choose to see it the opportunity to self-check against that instead of seeking validation in negative behavior. I think that’s all any of us can do.

It’s not sexy and it won’t generate a lot of blog drama rubbernecking, but it’s real and it’s far more respectful in my book than trying to appease egos that don’t need any more petting.

Tolerance is not acceptance. Silence is often difficult but necessary. We all slip, but we also need to recognize the slip and not champion the fall.

Now I’m having juice and crawling back to bed.

“If truth is beauty, how come no one has their hair done in a library.” ~ Lily Tomlin

So I’m just going to come right out and say it — I think Hair Fair 2010 sucks. I thought the Shoe Fair sucked. I think most fairs suck. Please stop reading here if you’re scandalized by those statements because you’re not going to be happy by the time I’m done. This is a rant.

When the Hair Fair started, it was a great idea to showcase one of the most addictive delightful pleasures of SL avatar customization: changing our hair at will. Color. Length. Curly. Retro. Pony. Updo. Piggy buns. Pink. Red. Jet. Every woman I know in SL will tell you their hair folder makes up the largest part of their vanity inventory. It’s even worse for those of us who delete nothing. I still have easily a hundred ETD Willow packs. I still cling to my Lash, Calla, and other outdated stuff. I don’t wear it, I just like knowing it’s there.

Yes. I have a problem.

Years ago (wait…how did it become years ago?) the Hair Fair was something that really felt like it was more about the charity than the designers. As the current Hair Fair organizers remind us, the whole point is to come together “as a creative community in one location for a charitable cause.”

Unfortunately, right now the Hair Fair, like nearly every other SL “fair” is just a huge waste of time. It’s a badly designed lag fest housing mostly mediocre content creators. Some of the big names that everyone wears aren’t there. And while a lot of blather gets bandied around about raising money for charity, the truth is that the average SLer could do more if they just made a donation straight to the charity.

This is not a personal attack against any of the individuals who put on the Hair Fair or any other fashion fair. I’m sure it’s hard work and I’m sure it feels thankless most of the time. It must seem very important and personal. I’ll even stipulate for the record that their hearts are probably in the right place. But let’s put the cards on the table. It’s time to call a clusterfuck a cluskerfuck.

Yeah, that’s right. Everything up until this point has been sugar coated. But sugar coating and pretending is what has contributed to letting the premiere event of the SL avatar customization market turn into a day of Wal-Mart watching. No more sugar coating.

The point by point run down.

1. The build. While the industrial tent look is a step above the “Candyland Vomit” theme of last year, it’s completely unshoppable. A system of mazes inside identical looking tents is uninspired and, frankly, idiotic. By all means, let’s take a lag-intensive environment and add to that the confusion of people not being able to keep track of where they’ve already been. Seriously? I was there 10 minutes and never stopped wanting to slap people.

2. The attending vendors. Let’s be blunt. 90% of the vendors at this year’s Hair Fair are presenting merchandise WAY below market quality. 90% is, going by the demos, generous. Which might be okay if their prices were also way below market, but they’re not. No, it wouldn’t be okay, even then. If you purchased hair at the Hair Fair this year, odds are your avatar is either really quirky or embarrassingly out of date. Like Philip Linden out of date. The stuff that isn’t out of date was largely ridiculous. Those participating creators who are producing market-quality work obviously shared a memo to release Hair Fair novelties instead of anything fashion worthy. I enjoy a good birdcage on my head as much as the next girl, but Whiskey Tango Foxtrot were most of you drinking when you came up with this stuff? Forgiving the “runway” hair that is only going to look good for the five minutes you’re standing still to take a photo, there were offerings that Dr Seuss characters wouldn’t be caught dead in. While they certainly are fine for freebies and laughs, I can’t imagine they sold in big numbers, raised the bar on creativity, or brought in much for charity. So…what’s the point? “Hey look, I can make a grandfather clock and you can wear it like hair.” Never stop slapping people.

3. Seaweed hair and other out-of-date texturing. Those of you making this stuff? Cut that shit out already. 2008 is on the phone to let you know you’re dated. If you’re still making and selling hair that looks like Linden trees or has that fresh-from-Photoshop gradient shine over motion blur filters — JUST STOP and go do something else with your time. Those friends telling you how much they like your stuff are lying to you. And I’m not even going to address those of you not using sculpts or flex prims because you all just need more slapping. It’s nice that you want to skill up. Go do that more and we’ll love you when you get back.

4. The non-attending vendors. When Stiletto Moody and Maitreya were not represented at the Shoe Fair and Shiny Things only displayed a prior release, I raised an eyebrow. But it was the Shoe Fair, so who cared? Now, however, we’re at the Hair Fair and Maitreya is once again not in residence, nor is Truth.

So here’s a fun fact: if you’re organizing a convention for a niche market and you can’t get the biggest names in that niche on board — even for charity — you are DOING SOMETHING WRONG. I don’t know the details. I don’t want to know. I don’t have to know. When you’re running the show, it’s your job to bring the big names to the gate and make them run around the oval with all the other ponies. If the big names aren’t interested, your little game is mediocre and not addressing the market in any significant way. I know more than anyone that designers can be demanding, drama-drenched, frustrating snits. But wooing them is the gig. Don’t take the gig if you can’t do the gig and don’t put on the show, if the show isn’t going to shoot for par or higher.

5. The non-attending big name vendors “stick it” attitudes. So during the Shoe Fair, Maitreya had a huge sale. As far as I know, it was the first sale in the history of their product line. I know there were days where I had to chain smoke TPs to get onto the Sim and I can’t imagine that didn’t put a big dent in Shoe Fair traffic. Truth had a sale that ended the day before the Hair Fair started. Truth has put out ten new releases since the Hair Fair began — one of which is a project for a charity that has nothing to do with the Hair Fair’s chosen charity. Maybe it’s all a coincidence. No. No it’s not. It’s obvious and deliberate and we can’t help but notice. Which means fair organizers not only failed to woo the biggest names in their genres, but they seem to have inspired the big names to compete against them. Once again, for those keeping score at home, this is an example of DOING IT WRONG.

6. The lackluster attitude toward charity. One of the really inspiring things about the Second Life community is that there is a sense of wanting to do good. We’re geeks and vanity girls, but we like to support causes. It fills us with happy. Charity is big in the hearts of SLers. But there is a sense lately that a lot of charity awareness and fund-raising is a sort of “going through the motions” effort by organizers to socially obligate participants and gain a promotional edge for their events. There isn’t a sense of charity, but a sense of lip service to a charity while they flog and flutter.

***EDITORIAL NOTE WITHIN THE RANT***

Wigs for Kids is a wonderful concept and it suits the Hair Fair perfectly. Go there now and make a donation if you can, even if it means you skip Starbucks on the way to work this week. They’re little kids with cancer and this project helps them maintain a healthy sense of self-worth while their little bodies heal from radiation and other horrible things little kids shouldn’t have to endure. Just go donate.

***END NOTE***

The thing is, if you do something for charity, that means you do it right. You don’t just toss out kiosks and have mediocre designers donate 50% of the sales from their least popular hairstyle. And, I have a question: how much of the “Participation Fees” are going to Wigs For Kids? Is it 100%? I couldn’t find that information on any part of the site. Shouldn’t that be a front-and-center statement for any charity event? 100% of all event-raised funds go directly to the charity? Yes? No? Maybe? You lead by example and there’s nothing that shows me what the “leaders” are doing. It’s all very “minimum requirement” mindset when you read the site. I mean, look at how aggressive this type of statement comes off: “This is how it is done, no exceptions will be made, and again, your deposit is non-refundable and considered a donation. We thank you for your contribution to this cause,”. You can be all bitchy about rules, but you can’t be bothered to put donation figures up for transparency sake? I’d like to see a declaration on the site that shows 100% of all participation fees go directly to the charity. I would email the organizers to get this information, but the point is I SHOULDN’T HAVE TO. Are you happy? You make me use caps. Like an unhinged flame warrior. This is where you people have driven me.

*EDIT: Please see comments for more on this. 100% of participation fees from 2010 Hair Fair *are* going to Wigs For Kids.

7. The attitude of the language on the Hair Fair 2010 official site. Passive-aggressive sorority brats are more tactful. Maybe this is a clue as to why some of the most high profile members of the community aren’t participating? I’m a sarcastic bitch on my blog, but it’s my blog, not the charity event I’m organizing. Maybe if a few more egos got left at the door, this event would go back to being a showplace and not an embarrassment. When the attitude of the site radiates “the community needs us more than we need the community” that’s not a good sign. In need of slapping. Lots and lots of slapping.

8. The rules on the Hair Fair 2010 official site. You have to read the FAQ page to really savor just how “our way or the highway” things get. The delusions of adequacy and self-importance drip from every corner of the language. The “secrecy” around the build (tents? really? there had to be secrecy for tents?), the hostility toward designers and bloggers, the lack of accommodation for anyone who operates a professional brand — it’s all unnecessary and draws focus on all the wrong things. The restrictions and attitude clearly indicate the organizers felt their convenience and self-serving rules were more important than anything else going on. If I made hair I wouldn’t participate under these rules. I certainly wasn’t going to follow their manifesto for “acceptance” to participate on Blogger’s Day. It reads like a clutch of PTA moms trying to jockey for alpha bitch of the bake sale. And failing.

9. The demo group paradox. This was a brilliant idea that allows shoppers to get DEMOS ahead of time so that they can just TP in and grab the hairstyles they want without lagging up the Sims. FANTABULOUS!

So wait — why do we need the fair location again? Why not just donate the money that would have gone to the fair set-up, release the demos, and let designers put up donation kiosks and vendors at their own locations? Use the website as a clearinghouse and central location for participant information. Then, the designers would be getting exposure for their store locations while still participating in the charity and there’s no laggy, badly designed SIM to navigate. You did the math and made the demo group, so let’s carry the one and take that next “we don’t need no stinkin’ location, we can embrace the unique strengths of our virtual environment” logical step.

10. The total lack of quality control. You’re a non-Linden organization. You don’t have to make sure every kid gets to bat. You can be bad Mommy and tell the kindergartners that while their macaroni necklaces are special, they don’t get to hang them up on Christian Dior mannequins. If you’re not going to be willing to bruise a few egos (and, obviously you are, because I’ve read your site) to maintain the integrity of the products being presented at your event, what exactly are all your pissy rules trying to accomplish? You can be tactful and say no to maintain the integrity of your presentation. Honest, you can.

11. Hair. Only hair. Nothing but hair. Oh, and bandannas. This is just off the top of my head (See what I did there? I’m trying to keep my sense of humor about all this…), but maybe if hair accessories and other hair-related crafters were allowed to participate we wouldn’t be witnessing such a nadir of quality from designers no one has head of. Just a thought.

I know I should have a 12 to make it seem even, but I’d just have to make it up — and let’s face it — several of these 11 are mostly just addressing how bad the majority of the participating creators were and how hostile the organizers seem.

Yes, this all reads mean spirited on my part. I’ll take that hit. There’s no joy for me in hurting people’s feelings and I sincerely hope that anyone who feels a sting from my words will be able to swallow hard and see the real purpose isn’t to attack, but to demand a higher standard. You don’t just sit around and let people embarrass themselves and their community by throwing marshmallows. There’s no crying in Hair Fair.

You’re either going to take virtual goods and their markets seriously, or you’re not. If you don’t, then there’s nothing to be upset about. If you do, then you needed what I said here right between your textured-on eyes.

I spend a lot of time — have spent a lot of time — trying to engage people in debate and convince them that avatar customization can be a sophisticated market; that virtual fashion isn’t just about a bunch of Wal-Mart moms wrapping themselves up in tacky ball gowns and stripper heels. I believe there must be consumer advocacy for virtual goods. I believe virtual fashion is something that women will lead with and be empowered by. And when I see the biggest ball on the biggest field get dropped by the biggest players, it really pisses me off. I want to slap until I can’t slap no more.

Deep. Slow. Cleansing. Breaths.

So okay. Let’s Reshuffle. Rethink. This decline cannot continue. If you’re participating in the organization of a future “Fair” event, here is your assignment — repeat it to yourself until it becomes your mantra:

1. Charity is not a side dish; it’s a main course. It will be treated like one.
2. Quality matters. It just does. Raise the bar.
3. I will invite and energize the community; I will not just dictate terms.
4. I will hire a copywriter who doesn’t sound like they have a stick up their ass.
5. I need the big names more than they need me. I will kiss ass and make exceptions when I have to. This isn’t about my ego, this is about doing things right and getting the right people involved.
6. I will stop thinking inside the box. I will stop building boxes because other people are expecting boxes. I don’t have to do things the way others did just because they did it first. I can innovate. I will evolve.
7. I will know the market I am showcasing and I will demonstrate respect for those who create and foster that market.
8. I will not make Salome want to slap me ever again.

When I link to this article next year, the word “squee” had better be a significant contribution to the bulk of my language.

Look. No one is saying everything has to be perfect. Aiming high means that a few things might fail. But you aim high, and if you fail your extra credit covers the fall. Do it right or don’t do it at all. It’s just that simple.

“In a controversy, the instant we feel anger, we have already ceased striving for truth and have begun striving for ourselves” ~ Abraham J. Heschel

Today, Linden Lab announced they will be banning log-ins from the popular, but discredited Emerald Viewer. The official statement can be read here but I managed to get a copy of the more accurate (and entirely imaginary) rough draft.

Finally Getting Rid of Those Damn Kids
The Pitfalls of Not Offering The Best Possible Product To Our Own Customers
An Open Apology To Our Users For Not Meeting Their Needs & Forcing Them Into Third Party Software Options
Emerald Viewer to be Blocked From Second Life

As of 10am PT Wednesday, September 8, the Emerald Viewer will be blocked from logging in to Second Life because it was developed and maintained by a bunch of untrustworthy children as a result of violations of our Policy on Third Party Viewers. Residents who have been using any version of the Emerald Viewer instead of our horrible clusterfuck of a product will need to use a different Viewer to access Second Life. You can download the official Second Life Viewer, developed by Linden Lab, here. We know it’s a crap viewer, but we spent a lot of money on it and we have to keep pimping it because corporate says so. Or you can learn more about alternative Viewers, which is really your only choice at this point, developed by third parties, here. There are several new Viewers listed in the TPV Directory, so there are many alternatives available to you other than our horrible product which we can’t see spending any more money on to improve since you people complain no matter what we do.

We eventually take Residents’ privacy, safety, and security very seriously given enough public pressure and will take action to enforce the policies that help protect it with the same speed and efficiency as we do everything else. As our CEO, Philip Rosedale, has blogged about, we recently removed the Emerald Viewer from our Third-Party Viewer Directory due to violations of our Policy on Third-Party Viewers. Also it made his system hair look even worse and more out of touch.

Since then, we have issued ultimatums been in communication with the Emerald development team and have requested several changes in order to remedy violations of our policy, including changes necessary to meet our privacy requirements, and to address GPL license violations. Knowing they were as dysfunctional as we are, we figured that would be the end of it. Unfortunately, the team was unable to comply within a stipulated time frame and resorted to cannibalism and speaking in tongues. As a result, we have decided to block logins from the Emerald Viewer in order to protect our Residents — not enough to improve the quality of our own product and negate the need for third party viewers, but just enough to make people stop yelling at us and stick it to those damn kids who keep letting people think they should be able to have positive experiences on the grid. All versions of the Emerald Viewer will be blocked from logging in to Second Life as of tomorrow at 10am. Please be aware that attempting to circumvent our blocking to access Second Life with a banned Viewer is a violation of the Policy on Third-Party Viewers and may result in the loss of one’s account. And this is actually something we plan to enforce, unlike most of the other stuff we just talk about and never do.