Bonus Mission #2 : Second Life - A game or so much more?

Why is Second Life not a game?

Most of us have gone through the Second Life experience, and we can attest to the fact that Second Life is not a game. "It does not have points, scores, winners or losers, levels, an end-strategy, or most of the other characteristics of games." (Wikipedia, "Second Life", 2007). To me, a game just provides a temporary distraction from real life stress. From this, it can be seen that SL is not a game - it is much more. It is a world in itself, albeit virtual, and anything that can done in real life, can also be done in Second Life.

Virtual worlds like Second Life mimic the real world as much as they can. Second Life has its own Linden Dollar (L$) that can be bought with real world money. You can sightsee and visit places in the world and have a fantastically fun time. Whilst doing so, you can also interact with other users and make friends from all around the world.

But since this is a virtual world, you can also do things beyond your physical limitations. Yes, you can visit other places but you can teleport to places like Italy and Rome (In SL only of course) in a split second. You can customize your appearance and make yourself look whatever way you like in this virtual world. And yes, it encourages user-generated content, so you can build things, even make your own chair! (something I've never tried, well, at least not yet) :D


We have already gone through why virtual worlds like Second Life is not a game, but it also proves that it can facilitate first world activities. Take World of Warcraft for instance. In WOW player, Mayfield was quoted as saying, "Warcraft is the new golf ... I actually closed a deal with a company I met through WOW." (Levy, 2006). However, online video game "America's Army" serves to push the boundaries of games by desensitizing people from virtual world violence. Everytime a soldier is shot down, "the name of a real American soldier, his age and the date he was killed in Iraq." (Clarren, 2006). With this, it can be seen that this "game" is doing much more than a game is supposed to do. We know the general consensus toward the Iraq War. By flashing the name of a real American soldier who died in that war, the game is not just being played here - it is making the bloodshed that happened more realistic. By doing so, it is setting and reinforcing the agenda, and framing people's thoughts towards this issue.

So are games like Second Life, WOW and America's Army really just games? Japanese venture capitalist Joi Ito summarizes it rather succinctly, "Yes, it's just a game.. The way that the real world is a game."


References

Clarren, Rebecca. (2006). "Virtually dead in Iraq". Retrieved April 6, 2007 from http://www.salon.com/ent/feature/2006/09/16/americasarmy/

Levy, Steven. (2006). "World of Warcraft: Is it a Game?" Retrieved April 6, 2007 from http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14757769/site/newsweek/page/3/print/1/displaymode/1098/

Wikipedia. "Second Life". (2007). Retrieved April 6, 2007 from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Life

QotW10: The diary of a game noob - A day in Second Life

Meet my alter ego in Second Life, Mellie Laval! This is her/me sitting on the chair in Orientation Island. Hmm. Seems like I forgot to change the size of my hands at that time. They look a tad too gigantic. Tsk tsk. I gotta say, I did not complete Orientation Island. When I was stuck at the board that prompted me to download QuickTime, I stupidly flew around (at that time, it was like WOW i fly!) and teleported elsewhere. I couldn't go back to Orientation Island to complete the rest of the walk thru. End of story -_-.


Oh kay, so why did I choose this SL name? I wanted my SL name to correspond with the initials of my real name, M.L. My avatar, well.. Looks nice! I was having fun altering the appearance of my alter ego, heh. I made her eyes a little bigger, nose a little sharper, body a little taller... It was like plastic surgery! I think the only real likeness to me is... I have those bangs! I also enjoyed altering her outfit, the one that was originally provided was uggly. I picked the nicest out of the freebies I got (everyone say YAY for freebies). I like the skirt she's wearing, but the top isn't something I'd wear in my first life. Heh.


I fly! After I stupidly teleported out of Orientation Island to explore and realised that I couldn't go back, I went to Help Island to raise my white flag. Had some interesting conversations with people there. Forgot to screencap them..


Still hanging around Help Island at this time. Yes, my alter ego does look pretty helpless.


Went on a lame attempt of a sight-seeing tour. I'm in Lion City! Not a soul in sight here!


Found Yepp Yoshikawa at Paolo Rome, Italy. By this time, SL was lagging on me and had crashed so many times that I was on the verge of pulling my hair out.


At the Jade's Jazz Lounge, sitting back whilst watching people dance. Sad to say, I only visited these 3 venues, so I do not even have a favourite place! I would have loved to explore SL even more. But as aforementioned, SL was lagging and crashing like mad on me. Ugh. I wanted to visit some gardens, museums, watch some movies, and attend some concerts and performances! Sigh, maybe another time.

QotW9: STOMPing = Singapore's outlet for Citizen Journalism?

Citizen Journalism is also known as "participatory journalism," and is the act of citizens "playing an active role in the process of collecting, reporting, analyzing and disseminating news". (Wikipedia, 2007, Citizen Journalism). What is so special about it, is that information does not come from professional journalists, but people like you and me.

We are witnessing a new phenomenon - again, where power is passed down to the common people. We are part of the "future of news". And why is that so? These days, anyone armed with a handphone equipped with a good camera and videocamcorder can report on what they see around them. You no longer need to be a professional journalist to report the news. According to Gillmore (2004), "[t]his time, the first draft of history was being written, in part, by the former audience. It was possible—it was inevitable—because of new publishing tools available on the Internet."



STOMP is a relatively new outlet for Singaporeans to connect and communicate with other fellow Singapore netizens. According to STOMP, this website offers an avenue which "integrates content and activities in the three platforms of print, online and mobile." (STOMP, 2007, About us). I commend SPH's efforts in promoting citizen journalism and encouraging their readers to be part of the news collection process. However, I do not believe that STOMP is an ideal form of citizen journalism for Singapore.

Firstly, when surfing around STOMP, I find myself asking, so which are the advertisements and which are the links I am supposed to click if I want to get information? The layout of the site is a little too cluttered to be considered a serious avenue for citizen journalism in Singapore. Instead, it strikes me as a platform for the local media to connect to the Singaporean on the streets.

On STOMP, you have podcasts, foodies club for your inner foodie, digital club for the tech whiz, EPL stomping ground for the soccer lovers, and of course forums to cater to various needs of the average Singaporean out there. There are many categories, some creatively named "the gym" for the gym rats out there, "vain pots" for... the vain pots, "let's play play" for the avid gamers etc. They also have their star bloggers, where they get local celebrities to blog about topics like, "Why can't we get along with our neighbouts" and "Take out your crystal ball. What kind of world would you envisage in the year 2050". Granted, it does make for occasional entertainment and interesting insights on how your average Singaporean thinks. It is a platform for Singaporeans to express themselves and to allow themselves to be heard, but citizen journalism is not promoted well enough to allow STOMP to be considered an ideal form of citizen journalism for Singapore.

There is not much to improve really, as STOMP does seem to be popular with a certain demographic of Singaporeans. However, if STOMP wants to be considered an ideal form of citizen journalism in the local blogosphere, some work is needed. Firstly, if STOMP ever wants to be considered a serious citizen journalism platform, that should be their main focal point, instead of branching out to forums, star blogs.. etc. Perhaps, the moderators of STOMP could consider allowing the voice of your average Singaporean be heard, like allowing your everdayman's insight on local issues to be published on the site more frequently. More can be done, but that is only if STOMP wants itself to be taken seriously as an avenue for citizen journalism. To me, that is not their focus.


References

"About Us". (2007). The Straits Times, STOMP. Retrieved March 29, 2007 from http://www.stomp.com.sg/about/about.html

Gillmor, D. (2004).“We the Media: Grassroots Journalism by the People, for the People”. Retrieved March 29, 2007 from http://download.nowis.com/index.cfm?phile=WeTheMedia.html&tipe=text/html

Wikipedia. “Citizen journalism”. (2007). Retrieved March 29, 2007 from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizen_journalism

QotW8: Blogs and Politics

Blogger's pseudonym: Mr. Wang
Blog: http://mrwangsaysso.blogspot.com/
Occupation: Citizen Blogger
Blog's Date of Birth: Dec 22,2006. However, his old blog ( http://commentarysingapore.blogspot.com/) show posts that date back to as far as 28 January 2000.
Technorati Rank: 26,774 (332 links from 143 blogs)

Mr. Wang's Tone

Surfing around the Internet, netizens should be able to note that there are more citizen journalism blogs popping up around the net, especially related to politics or what is going on around the world. Mr. Wang is a famous blogger who has a strong online presence, and like most citizen journalism blogs, he takes a very commentative approach towards current affairs in his blog. Take for instance a statement in his recent post titled "What we Believe" posted on March 16, 2007:

I learned ... that the National Council of Churches of Singapore is seeking to criminalise lesbianism. I find this disturbing. I sense a potential threat to the freedom of religion in Singapore.

Mutual respect and tolerance is the basic principle on which an inter-religious society like Singapore can hold itself together, in relative harmony.

This quote above encompasses how he feels about this current issue, and like the way he has written above, the rest of his blog posts are about his opinions on the happenings in Singapore, and he takes a rather no-holds-barred approach towards his dissection of issues.

The fans and readers of his blog show good thinking capacity and great mental sophistication towards the issues he blogs about or highlights too. Regarding this issue about freedom of religion in Singapore, a reader Boon had his take on this issue, and his main point is phrased out rather succinctly:

Religion is a personal issue. But when it encroaches on the public domain, people must be allowed to speak up despite "religious sensitivities".

He is not the only reader who has added input into this issue that Mr. Wang has highlighted, and many of the comments posted by other readers also show great insight, and very well thought out opinions. Like blogger, like readers.

Blogs = More Democracy?

We live in an era of knowledge and empowerment. With the Internet at our fingertips, we are afforded a great deal of information with the mere click of a mouse. The Singapore government heavily regulates our local media, but it is near impossible to do that online. Citizen Journalism blogs have sprouted up all over the Internet, and there is no way they can stop people from airing their opinions on politics or any other issue, as long as it is not something slanderous.

According to Thornton, the Chicago communcation school "viewed communication as more than information circulation ... [it was] the process in which people create a culture and maintain it." In the case of blogs and politics, it is true. In this process, people do not just feed each other with information.With this new phenomenon of citizen journalism blogs, there is a gathering place for people to discuss politics, and a culture will sprout out of it.

In short, I believe that democracy will come out of blogs discussing politics and current affairs. I do not think it will affect government policy to a great deal just yet, but it affords netizens the knowledge about what is going on, and knowledge is really power.

These blogs allow for people to have their own take on current issues, and it acts as a voice for the common people. With these blogs, they are allowed to have a platform to air what they think, and this can be cathartic. People can bond with the need to protect their own rights, and I forsee that this will be powerful enough one day to influence government regulation. That itself, is democracy.


References

Giam, G. (2006). “The politics of Singapore’s new media in 2006.” Retrieved on March 24, 2007 from
http://theonlinecitizen.com/2006/12/31/review-the-politics-of-singapores-new-media-in-2006/

Thornton, A. (2002). Does Internet Create Democracy? Retrieved on March 24, 2007 from
http://www.zip.com.au/~athornto/

QotW7: Tweet-er!

Would you Consider Twitter an Online Community?

An online community is one that comprises of a group of people that communicate or interact via the Internet. Different communities advocate different levels of participation. According to Amy Jo Kim, there are 2 different kinds of online communities - the traditional structure online communities, and the more individual-centric, bottom-up sort of interaction (Wikipedia, 2007).

The traditional structure online communites include online discussion boards and chat rooms. Participation in these mediums are more difficult than they seem, as they require mechanisms like gift-giving and reciprocity to establish reputation. For individual-centric, bottom-up sort of interaction like blogging, participation could entail something as simple as leaving comments or tags on someone's blog.

What is great about an online community is that it is able to connect people "without regard to race, creed, gender or geography." (Wellman & Guila, 1996) Even though an online community can transcend beyond the physical and geographical location of a person, there must also be at least one common factor to bind people of a community together. In the case of Twitter, all of us joined as it was part of our assignment ;) That's what binds us, at least in the Twitter community!

Thus, to answer the question - Is Twitter an Online Community? Definitely! Twitter is an online form of social networking that is more popular in the US and UK, but barely known here in Singapore! Well, thanks to this blog assignment, all of us got to experience what it was like interacting with each other through this hybrid of a tag box and a chat room, and it proved to be quite additctive and interesting!

Well then, why is it an Online Community? An online community is one that comprises of a group of people who interact via the Internet. Yes, without a doubt, we can do that with Twitter! However, in a way, I believe that Twitter is a fusion of both types of Online Community. It is a traditional structure online community simply because it operates like a chat room where you and your friends can interact with each other via your live updates. However, it is also an individual-centric, bottom-up sort of interaction because you can import Twitter as a widget onto your own blog, and your blog readers will get to know your live updates even if they do not have a Twitter account, or do not know what Twitter is. They can then respond to the live updates (from your Twitter) on your blog via your comments or your tagboard!

Undoubtedly, Twitter is an online community, and I hope that I have substantiated my argument sufficiently to prove that it is :)


References

Butler, B., Sproull, L., Kiesler, S. & Kraut, R. (2002). "Community Effort in Online Groups: Who Does the Work and Why?" Retrieved March 14, 2007 from http://pascal.case.unibz.it/retrieve/3248/butler.pdf

Fernback, J. & Thompson, B. (1995). "Virtual Communities: Abort, Retry, Failure?" Retrieved March 13, 2007 from http://www.rheingold.com/texts/techpolitix/VCcivil.html

Wellman, B. & Gulia, M. (1996). "Net Surfers Don't Ride Alone: Virtual Communities as Communities." Retrieved March 13, 2007 from http://www.acm.org/%7Eccp/references/wellman/wellman.html

Wikipedia (2007). Virtual Community. Retrieved March 15, 2007 from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_communities

QotW5: What’s the deal about Online Identity?

The Internet is mediating a new form of communication people would never have imagined a mere five decades ago – virtual communication. Interaction amongst people need not be face-to-face. Our physical selves are associated with an identity that people know us for. We cannot hide from it, nor can we change it. However, online identity can be created from scratch. Some people choose to change their identity totally (i.e. those indecent people with too much free time on their hands lurking chat rooms to prey on unsuspecting and innocent girls), but most people’s online identity would normally be close to their own offline identity.

Now, just what is an online identity, and how different is it from our normal offline one? In an offline context, interaction is face to face, and a continual process where we process verbal, and more importantly, non-verbal cues. However, creating an online identity is different. Online, we are beings connected and connecting via our keyboards. Without non-verbal cues to decode, we have to be “attuned to the nuances of email addresses and signature style.” (Donath, 1996).

I participate very frequently in virtual message boards, and often scour the net for forums to search for information. In a very established forum (like Soompi Forums) that I once participated in, there were many people who were establishing an online identity, or already had a very established online identity. It is not that easy to acquire a reputable online identity – it just requires a lot of time, effort and most importantly, trust from other members. Members of such a community interact with each other via message boards, or the chat function. By the time I had joined online communities, there were already a few distinguished elders whose reputation preceded them. Most of these elders had up to thousands of posts to their identity, and most had already gained ‘administrator’ status in the community. They were considered gurus in their area of expertise, and had devoted a lot of their own time contributing information, or ‘gifts’ to the community. Members in the community valued their input, and these reputable figures were held in high regard.

Now, anyone can assume or steal an online identity. “The very term "identity theft" is an oxymoron. Someone's identity is the one thing about a person that cannot be stolen.” (Schneier, 2005). However, it is entirely possible on the Internet. The issue here is that we cannot be seen – what connects us is what we type on the screen, or what we choose to type. Anyone equipped with hacking skills can easily hack into an account and steal that account, and assume your identity (What an irony! Your identity is supposed to be the one thing people can’t take away from you) in an online virtual community. With the chat function present in many forums nowadays, that makes it even easier – someone can just log into the chat room using your username (unless you have prevented anyone else from using that username except you) and everyone will just assume it is you. It is dangerous, but inevitable. Now, with things moving to the web, there is nothing that cannot be stolen anymore.



References

Donath, J.S. (1996). “Identity and Deception in the Virtual Community”. Retrieved February 21, 2007 from http://smg.media.mit.edu/people/Judith/Identity/IdentityDeception.html

Hassan, M. & Zhang, Y.C. (2004). “Manifesto for the Reputation Society”. Retrieved February 21, 2007 from http://www.firstmonday.dk/issues/issue9_7/masum/

Schneier, B. (2005). “Mitigating Identity Theft”. Retrieved February 21, 2007 from http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2005/04/mitigating_iden.html

Wood, A.F. & Smith, M.J. (2001). Online Communication: Linking Technology, Identity & Culture. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

QotW4: To give and not to receive... Is that even possible?!

Introduction

Does a true gift really exist? When you receive a gift, are there really no strings attached? According to Rheingold (1993), a gift economy is one “in which help and information is offered without the expectation of any direct, immediate quid-pro-quo.” Well, to a certain extent, it can happen in online discussion forums where digital information is freely shared. Despite the fact that the gift economy is a form of transaction where goods and services are given, the giver does stand to gain from this form of transaction as well.

What is a Gift?

A gift is the obligatory transfer of inalienable objects or services between related and mutually obligated transactors (Carrier, 1991). The concept of the gift involves some “element of personal interdependence – the giver of a gift remains an element of the good or service and does not alienate himself from it” (Bell, 1991). In the context of digital files, you would remember what you receive from someone as the file you got from XYZ user, as opposed to a commodity based system, where you just buy the file. However, I do not believe that a gift comes with no strings attached at all. When someone gives something, they are bound to receive something in return, even if it does not come in a tangible form. Moreover, the reciprocal relationship engendered in gift-giving forms the moral basis of society (Zeitlyn, 2003).

My Gift Economy

There is an overabundance of gift economies on the net, but the one I choose would be D-Addicts, a torrent and discussion group site for Asian dramas. From this site, people put up the latest Japanese, Chinese and Korean dramas on the net for sharing and general distribution, via BitTorrent. There is also a forum in the site for people to discuss the recently put up dramas/past drama series.

Just why is it considered a gift economy then? The people who take the effort to upload these shows are doing it for the general benefit of the people who are members of this site, and even the general net-surfing public. This site does not require you to be a member to download files, so there are many people who go there just to leech on the files. And yet, the contributors of this site continue to contribute anyway, knowing full well that these ‘leeches’ are unlikely to reciprocate their generosity.

However, they receive their rewards in other intangible ways. First, I believe it would be a heightened sense of self-worth. When you contribute files at the expense of your own time without expecting any form of immediate reciprocation, people would perceive you as generous, and a favorable impression of you would be formed. When people think of you in a positive way, you would also feel good about yourself. Besides this, participating in a gift economy would also improve your standing in the community, and extend your social networks. When you contribute regularly in a community, more people will recognize you for your efforts, and you would slowly rise the ranks and be an elder in the community. With an increased standing and visibility in the community, you would also be able to befriend more people and widen your social network online with people who share similar interests with you.

Conclusion

I believe that the “gift economy is important, not only because it creates openness, but also because it organizes relationships between people in a certain way.” (Bergquist & Ljungberg, 2001) And the advent of the Internet has made it all possible. However, the gift economy is not totally altruistic in nature, and I have demonstrated how the bearers of gifts online also get to receive their awards. As I have mentioned, the reciprocal relationship, even if it is not explicit in the case of gift economies, forms the moral basis of our society. There is no such thing as a totally altruistic action in the case of an economy.



References

Bell, D. (1991). Mode of Exchange: Gift and Commodity. The Journal of Socio-Economics. 20, 155-167.

Bergquist, M. & Ljungberg, J. (2001). The power of gifts: organizing social relationships in open source communities. Information Systems Journal 11(4): 305–320.

Carrier, J. (1991). Gifts, Commodities, and Social Relations: A Maussian View of Exchange. Sociological Forum 6(1): 119-136.

Kollock, P. (1999). 'The Economies of Online Cooperation; Gifts and Public Goods in Cyberspace". Retrieved February 9, 2007 from http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/soc/faculty/kollock/papers/economies.htm

Rheingold, H. (1993). The Virtual Community: Homesteading on the Electronic Frontier. New York: Addison-Wesley

Zeitlyn, D. (2003). Gift economies in the development of open source software: anthropological reflections. Research Policy. 32, 1287-1291.