Philip Rosedale @ Linden Lab: SL is a Game For People With A Lot of Time

Alright, so, after reading this article on Reuters about a new CEO possibly coming to Linden Lab within weeks, it makes me all the more reassured that Linden Lab is going in the right direction.

Philip Rosedale, soon-to-be-former-CEO and soon-to-be-Chairperson of Linden Lab, reiterated the future growth of Second Life, and went over the usual stuff.

UNTIL:

----

Asked to explain the appeal of Second Life — which has no game-like aspects such as points-scoring, winners or losers — Rosedale said: “The only thing that SL users have in common is that they have a lot of time.”

Users in big cities such as New York or Los Angeles were least likely to spend time in Second Life, not only because they were busy but because they had less need to escape to an alternative, anonymous world, he said.

“Bad weather, oppressive regimes, poor economic conditions — that’s what makes an SL user.”

----

Holy. Did I really just read that? Did Philip really just not only dis his user base as shut-ins who need escape, but also by implication knock any business uses of Second Life?

Let's break this down line by line.

"The only thing that SL users have in common is that they have a lot of time."

I think this statement speaks for itself, and, personally, I find this a bit offensive and over-generalizing. But that aside, Rosedale misses the point entirely! Maybe SL has such a steep learning curve that only people really dedicated get past it? And yet, at the same time, I've seen the statistics. There are certainly very active users, but there are casual users as well.

"Users in big cities such as New York or Los Angeles were least likely to spend time in Second Life, not only because they were busy but because they had less need to escape to an alternative, anonymous world, he said."

Okay, let's take this in two parts. First, is the concept that city-dwellers aren't into Second Life. So, tech-savvy people who spend time on blogs, doing social networking on Facebook and MySpace, who talk about YouTube videos at the water cooler in the morning - these same people are too busy? They don't have a need to escape? You mean, with all the stresses of having city life, a high-velocity career, big goals, expensive rent ... they *don't* want to escape? You have GOT to be kidding me.

And then, the other part of it is this bold, WRONG statement that Second Life is about the "need to escape to an alternative, anonymous world".

HOLY. S***.

There, I said it. This comment is perhaps the most flabbergasting, for a variety of major reasons:

1. Tons of people are transparent in Second Life and other virtual worlds, being who they are in real life both in and out of Second Life. Saying that Second Life is about being only an "alternate, anonymous world" is fundamentally wrong. And I've been saying it for years that "Second Life" is an awful name because it fosters this idea, but to hear it from Rosedale was crazy!

2. Escapism? Is that the only reason people are in Second Life? Perhaps Rosedale has forgotten the hundreds of businesses and universities existing, working, learning, and collaborating in Second Life and other virtual spaces.

Seriously, is Philip completely out of touch with his user-base?

Finally, fuzzy logic:

“Bad weather, oppressive regimes, poor economic conditions — that’s what makes an SL user.”

So, right after he explains how technology is still lagging behind what Second Life needs from the average user to have to run smoothly, he says that the places least likely to have good computers or broadband will have the most users. Riiiiight.

I realize in this case, Philip's dream is that virtual worlds might change the world and empower people all over the globe to connect, create, and communication. I wholeheartedly agree with this sentiment. But to say that the users are all in impoverished countries is blatantly ignoring the empirical data that Zee Linden collects every month about usage statistics.

Did Rosedale make a huge faux-pas? Or, is this *the real* Philip Rosedale, now that he's not CEO, speakinig his mind more freely?

I guess I lean toward the accidental faux pas, considering he's always been very much about freedom of speech. But, who can say but Philip?

Well, I went to the office hours of Robin Harper (VP at Linden Lab), and she had this to say:
"Hiro, believe me, Philip is quite sorry he said that."

Of course, she used my avatar name, not my real name. *wry smirk*

And then I was given another quote, that Philip Rosedale "felt that the way I used his remark about bad weather, oppressive regimes and poor economic conditions being things that make a SL user implied tha the thought these things typified SL users and that he had a negative opinion of them."

Evidence of Entrenched Philosophy at Linden Lab?

So I have to wonder though if this is a sneak peak at larger issues? Is this why Cory was fired? Is this why Philip needs to step down as CEO? Is this signs of bigger issues at Linden Lab that need cleaning up?

Let's look at some evidence.

1. "Second Life" implies an alternate, new reality.
2. It took Linden Lab 4 years to get the SL Grid branding to sell Second Life's business possibilities.
3. Users are still called "residents".
4. It took Linden Lab 7 years to get a basic HTML window inside the SL browser.
5. The whole control scheme of Second Life is based on video game standards. WASD keys for controls, right-click menu, third person interaction, etc.
6. Where there are possibilities for more Internet-like controls, they've been overlooked. The profile, rather than acting like an AIM/Yahoo chat profile, read more like character playsheets for a MMORPG. You can't nickname people. You can't build widgets to connect to SL's search, or groups, or chat. There are no text-based interactions like buttons or pull-down selectors - only prims.
7. Consider Second Life originally did not have direct teleports (the equivalent of surfing from page to page on the Internet).
8. Consider Second Life's rampant inability to manage (tolerance of) griefing.
9. Consider Philip Rosedale's words from 2005 SLCC where he said he barely gets in world. And maybe that's it. Maybe he's lost touch with what SL can be about?

It seems to me that this is evidence that there's a "SL is a game" culture that they've been slowly emerging from for the last couple years. Whether this evidence leads to a truth or not, that remains to be seen. There are, however, other virtual worlds which aim to be a "Metaverse" world that take a much more web-centric paradigm for interface and controls. At the same time, they don't have the success of Second Life yet. And so the debate is unfinished.

Does Linden Lab want Second Life to continue to evolve? Do they really want to be a keystone in what will be "The Metaverse". Or, more importantly - do they even have a consistent definition of what "The Metaverse" is? I'm left with lots of questions, because this does not seem like attitude the Linden Lab we all know and love. In fact, if I were working at Linden Lab, working hard to see all the different possibilities of what Second Life is capable, I might feel a little perplexed that Rosedale would make such statements.

And so, I brought the crux of this concern to Robin, and hopefully we will find out whether Philip talked about business and Reuters simply chose not to print it. But, at the same time, I'm left wondering - does Linden Lab have one clear vision for their platform, and are they enunciating this vision clearly?

---

EDIT: Addendum

Linden Lab *just* minutes ago announced their new CEO, Mark Kingdon, formerly of Organic, Inc. This likely bodes very well for Linden Lab! Congrats out to Mark and to Linden Lab for making it through the limbo process between CEOs so quickly!