Talk:Criticism of Second Life

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] regarding any requests for speedy deletion

Please see Talk:Second_Life#WP:SIZE.3B_Dividing_out_Second_Life.2FIssues_and_criticisms, Talk:Second_Life/Archive3#Cutting_down_article_bloat.

Signpostmarv 07:37, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

What about that bot someone scripted that copies someone's avatar perfectly, thereby ruining their ability to exclusively sell that avatar?
The previous unsigned comment was made 20:21, November 15, 2006 by User:64.122.208.51
See CopyBot
Signpostmarv 15:19, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Meaning of "ownership" in Second Life

What does it mean to "own" something in Second Life? What legal guarantees does Linden Labs extend to owners of land/textures/models? If Linden Labs has a server crash and loses all of your owned data, are they legally liable? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.9.0.27 (talk • contribs)

See the Terms of Service
Signpostmarv 05:00, 12 January 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Questions

Signpostmarv seems to have a big problem with this article. It has been tagged so thoroughly that it disrupts the reading process. There is no need to put Citation needeed tags at the end of every sentence. Looking at the article history, it does not seem that user Signpostmarv may be the most neutral person to flag this article. It frankly is obnoxious the ammount of meta that has been thrown on top of an otherwise NPOV article. Clearly there are many, many problems with second life, many controversies, I would suggest a fully expanded Criticisms section within the main Second Life article. However, if this article is to stand on its own, it must be not me stunted by attempts to quash any growth. Someone has used wikitags and made allegations that this article uses Weasel words, YET there is no discussion history illustrating such an opinion. It would seem to be unfair to flag any article with any such criticism without justifying such a lable on the talk page. Will watch ths articles growth.Testerer 06:17, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

If you examine the history of this article, you'll notice that most of the content got moved out into it's relevant articles, rather than piling everything into the main article (the lawsuit for example was moved to the Linden Lab article). This article is not intended to stand on it's own, but little or no discussion has taken place with regards to where the individual sections should be moved to. The wikipedia is about verifiability, and the statements flagged with {{cn}} should have references attached because of this.
Signpostmarv 13:49, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
You'll also note I created the article in the first place, so to think I have a big problem with the article would be a bit ironic.
Signpostmarv 13:51, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6175441.stm

  1. Yes it illustrates that child pornography is illegal in the UK.
  2. No it doesn't have any relevance to "age play" activities in Second Life.

Question: Should this link be kept in the article while a more suitable link is found (e.g. one that relates to Second Life and issues of child pornography), or should it be removed on the grounds that it's only relevant to half of the issue, and not directly related to Second Life ?
Signpostmarv 15:31, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

The article states that computer-generated child abuse images are illegal. If you were to look at someone who was sexually "ageplaying" in Second Life, your computer would render such an image from the data given by the Second Life server. I think the relevance is pretty clear.. 62.3.233.118 19:23, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Agreed, it's clearly relevant, it's talking about any depiction of child abuse, and would cover Second Life. If you want an article relating this to Second Life, then there's one here [1]. Mdwh 23:07, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Section involving childhood isolation

There is a noteworthy controversy towards Second Life about how some children are giving up their real lives to just play Second Life. The children give up school, quality time, and other important social aspects so they can play online. I do have a source for it, so if anyone wants, they can add the section or I can. SOURCE: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6375226&ft=1&f=1048 Ekansonic55 02:06, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Just a note- this won't be anything special, this is just the same as kids playing WoW etc instead of socialising.
Personally, if a kid is "giving up on real life in favour of second life", that means there's something considerably wrong with their real life that they favour the escapism of a virtual world.
Signpostmarv 13:14, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
No, they get addicted to it. Ekansonic55 04:23, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
And the reason people get addicted to something is because whatever they have is lacking what the thing in question provides them.
Signpostmarv 15:03, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

You are very correct but I was just suggesting. Indeed children would give up normal life because obviously Second Life allows things beyond the limits of real life. Ekansonic55 00:04, 20 April 2007 (UTC)


if they get addicted to it or if a kid is "giving up on real life in favour of second life", it does not matter to me, dont le this be abused. cap out ammount of time allowed. do you want people doing one thing for over a certain number of hours a day? restrict usage, i care more about kids playing for 15 hours than curses or sex. Guardimp 07:18, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] June 2007 - Neutrality

Tagged the article for nomination to be checked for neutrality, using {{POV-check}}. One of the core policies of Wikipedia is that articles should always be written from a neutral point of view. This is one of the the Five Pillars of Wikipedia. It seems that many parts of this article contain user opinions. --Dillard421 09:59, 9 July 2007 (UTC)


If you ever played Second Life for an extended amount of time all the issues listed here are real. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.208.84.21 (talk) 03:02, August 23, 2007 (UTC)

  • That's irrelevant. Sources are what's relevant in Wikipedia. 68.146.41.232 (talk) 17:20, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Bugs

Should the article include a discussion regarding bugs? My particular "favorites" (note the quotation marks) is the one that causes one's avatar to start flying uncontrollably, either away from a location, sometimes horizontally, despite limits on flight. And then there are those who spend hours "camping" only to find the time wasted because they decided to check their e-mail or surf the Net, which sometimes causes the SL client to log you out even though the image in the program window still shows you taking part in whatever activity you were doing before doing off elsewhere. A third bug involves the sim lag issue, which has driven some area owners to request and in some cases require that visiting avatars remove any scripted add-ons or high "prim" appearances. All three glicthes (well the last is more preventative) are issues that seem to be pretty frequent, from what I've seen. 23skidoo 19:50, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

There's a Grey Goo Fence now, fyi. --217.93.247.47 (talk) 19:53, 14 May 2008 (UTC)