“This doesn’t mean there’s been no impact, or that Linden Lab should not revise its ToS to be more fair and transparent — in my opinion, it should — however, it’s also worth keeping this data in mind. Because having consulted for Linden Lab many years ago, I can make a educated guess at what they’re thinking right now:
They see a few thousand people (at best) making complaints, while several hundred thousand continue on as usual. And from their perspective, they’re probably wondering how genuinely controversial the controversy really is.” Hamlet Au in a blog post on New World Notes: Despite Second Life’s Draconian Terms of Service Change, SL User Activity Growing Strongly Since Then
The above quote is from a blog post where Hamlet Au explains that concurrency in Second Life has risen since the TOS changes. Below the article in the comments people point out that this is probably the traditional recovery from the summer slump. However whether it shows the TOS changes aren’t having a negative impact in terms of concurrency or not, it really exemplifies how Linden Lab have lost control of the conversation, we’re back to the speculation nation.
I’ve been a long time critic of Linden Lab’s lack of communication with the community. The TOS issue has really highlighted how much of a pickle a company can get itself in when it does not communicate well. Having read numerous blog and forum posts, as well as looking into old TOS I’m now firmly of the opinion that Linden Lab come in peace. I believe that they wanted a unified TOS and decided the terms of Desura made the best fit for parts of a TOS that covers pretty much all of Linden Lab’s products.
The problem Linden Lab have faced from the Second Life community is that Second Life users are reading this as a TOS aimed at Second Life only. This has caused people to speculate that Second Life is going to be sold, that Linden Lab want to sell Second Life content anywhere they like and that Linden Lab are making underhanded moves. If Linden Lab’s intent was to sell Second Life, they’d have been better off leaving the TOS as it was and allowing the new people to change it, bringing it under the unified TOS suggests to me they have no intention of selling.
However as I said, the lack of communication from Linden Lab has allowed this sort of speculation to grow. They’ve also put themselves in a position whereby other virtual worlds, such as Cloud Party, have been able to make tongue in cheek blog posts giving them a bit of a ribbing and stating how they respect content creators.
The idea that Linden Lab don’t respect content creators is absolute balderdash. Content creators are a central plank in the Second Life existence. However, by losing control of the conversation Linden Lab have made a rod for their own backs.
In years gone by Linden Lab would engage with the community, they’d post in the forums, they’d post blogs with open comments, they’d hold town hall meetings, later they’d hold office hours, user groups, yadda yadda yadda. These days there’s no Robin, Catherine, Blondin, Pink or Jack type Linden to engage with and this vacuum has allowed the current TOS debate to morph to levels it should never have been allowed to morph to.
The counter argument here is usually that people just wanted to vent, the meetings weren’t productive, that they were a waste of everyone’s time, that the pitchfork and torch brigade forced the Lindens to retreat. There were many incidents of fierce criticism at those meetings, in those blog posts etc. but the thing was that there were also people defending Linden Lab and they did so based on the communications from various Lindens, which gave people the material with which to make counter points.
It’s at this point that I yet again have to point to an article by Eric Ries who was involved with IMVU and There … I think! The Cardinal Sin Of Community Management. In that post Eric says:
“I’ll tell you the honest truth: listening to customers is gruesome, uncomfortable, and painful work. Sure it has its moments, but then so does getting stranded on a desert island.
Yet few products these days can succeed without their online community, and the insight you can gain from interacting with that community is unparalleled, despite the pain. But to take advantage of that learning, you have to avoid the absolutely one and only cardinal sin of community management: not listening.”
The article is a good read, it has a lot of interesting commentary. Are Linden Lab listening regarding the TOS changes? Personally I believe they absolutely are listening, but there has been no blog post, no forum engagement, no engagement with the Second Life community on their own turf and that will make people believe that Linden Lab aren’t listening.
Yahoo, who have came in for fierce criticism for their redesigns of groups, email and Flickr have Yahoo Feedback. This doesn’t stop people being critical, but it does allow engagement. Updates are posted on issues, some issues are said to be gathering feedback, others have responses, it’s community engagement.
People have been critical that the only comments from Linden Lab have been to bloggers and the UCCSL. This is fair criticism, Linden Lab’s Peter Gray, whom I currently picture walking down the street in a suit and sunglasses Resevoir Dogs style is all alone on a crowded island.
Linden Lab should be looking to grab the TOS conversation by the scruff of the neck, give it a good shaking and take control of it. They should also be considering the importance of community relations to try and prevent these sort of issues in the future.
On the other side of the coin, Second Life users should take a deep breath and put their pitchforks and torches in storage for now and give Linden Lab more time to come up with a response, although it would be nice if Linden Lab themselves were giving people official notice of the response they gave UCCSL. Linden Lab do still have a blog, it should be being used here.
Bravo! Some really useful post that one can read and agree fully!