last november i quoted Philip Rosedale who said
Smart people in rural areas, the handicapped, people looking for companionship, they love it. But you have to be highly motivated to get on and learn to use it.
that’s a heck of a generalisation and he went on to discount a Stanford grad’s sacrifice and hard work in going to school and that hiring a Brasilian kid made more sense. perhaps that makes sense when you have a posh life and did not have to work hard to put yourself through a degree or you prefer to pay as little as possible to get ahead
his attitude was cavalier, in my opinion, and certainly is not one of community. a community approach would first look in your own backyard, then your region, and then your country. maybe that bespeaks Linden Lab’s inability to be community-focused (ie, the SLCC cancellation for example)
what rekindled this issue for me was Mera’s repost of Broken people in Second Life?
Mera writes brilliantly about a point that i would like to make in a slightly different way. like Mera, i believe virtual worlds attract a fairly representative sample of the average population. i also acknowledge that virtual worlds do allow for many people to engage with the world, just like facebook, twitter, or blogging does. it’s computer-based so that means you can do it from almost anywhere regardless of your personal challenges or of regional challenges (by regional, think of places in the world that it may be difficult to have a bikini shop or sell real estate)
rather than saying only highly motivated people who are lonely, in the country, or the impaired will endure learning how to use virtual worlds (a la Philip); i would frame it as a wonderful tool that enables a large number of people to be expressive and creative