There has been a kerfuffle in the force. Perhaps the first learning of the MU year was the following: people have different views on things. It was related to class participants of Cafe Sophistry that a chat transcript would be released on the web after the discussion had taken place. This did not sit well with at least one class participant. The Cafe Sophistry blog currently lists the chat transcripts as pending review of participants. I did some research and found some friendly help on the SL forums: http://community.secondlife.com/t5/Everything-Else/Can-I-post-a-chat-transcript-from-SL-onto-the-web/qaq-p/2909416 Two questions come to mind 1) does MU have a clear policy on content of classes and specifically sharing content that may contain otherwise private privileged information shared between individuals “rolepaying” an education space in a virtual world? 2) As MU asserts affordances and vulnerabilities in a virtual world relating to said same “roleplaying” of an education space does MU have a clear policy on resolving disputes, in trust, between individuals, and potential legal issues arising therefrom?
-
Tiffany Mosienko
Reply
Aero Bigboots
AlexandreLois1
Ananda Crystal
Andrea Foenander
astrid
Aunt Renie
Aurelia Scheppers
Christa Forster
Ciara Finnegan
Bird on a Cyber Twig
Diptheria
Donnie Archer
Edie
Elle
Emma
Elizabeth Taylor Swift
Fanny
FeelsEmpty
Glad Kidd
Izzy
Jade Ravenheart
Kate Nova
Ken Doll
Mary Anning
Meg O'Ryan
Michael Masucci
Mireille
Molly Ross
Monerda Skute
Myra
Neeva
Newton
Michel Nostradamus
Oona
Oscar
Owen
Patrick J. Sweetman
Paypabak Writer
Pearl Grey
Rebecca Narum
rmarie
Ryan
Scarlett Luv
Sello Tape
Serra Qendra
Teresa of Avila
The Knight
Tiffany Mosienko
TrilbyM
Tullia Aragona
Vanessa
veyot
wendz tempest
Xue
Yellow Fever
Ysidora Pico
Yves
Zsophia
Newton 02:25 on 03/03/2015 Permalink |
Well, to be fair, one person merely waxed philosophical about whether people would be as forthcoming if they knew their words would be posted to a blog later on. Then I started to worry about it and wanted to make sure the participants understood that. Is it enough to state at the end of a class that the transcript will be posted?
Good question about policy, Tiffany. Could this be something the coordinator gets sign-off on (“Would you prefer to have transcripts sent privately in class or etc?”)…
As of now, as for Café Sophistry, it’s all there to read.
Izzy 07:54 on 03/03/2015 Permalink |
There’s a lot that could be said about this question technically, but I think the focus here is more “personal” that “technical.”
Sincere apologies in advance if I’m reading this totally wrong, but Tiffany, your language, so academic, convoluted, and dense, that I have almost no idea of what you’re truly saying, I think is a very circuitous way of saying,
If I read that way wrong, I’m very, very sorry. It’s my best guess. My writing is convoluted enough that I shouldn’t be critiquing anyone else, but Tiffany, yours was really convoluted. It’s ok to be annoyed, offended, or hurt. But I’d suggest, if possible, being clearer and more direct about that.
Since I’m someone who wants to document everything, my own bias would be to publishing transcripts. ATM the experience of MU is “hot” vs the “cool” of the web. But one year from today the only way anyone will ever know this place existed or that we thought about anything, is via this legacy of web documentation. So I’m for documenting as much as possible.
Still, if the class were “how to stack prims,” I think publishing a transcript would be a more simple case. In something like a Crit Class where emotions can be on the line, or an Identity exploration like Cafe Sophistry, much as I value documentation, I do see how it could be too invasive to the participants.
To some degree, where the chat was held matters. In 1-to-1 IM, or in a Group IM of 4-5 peeps, I think there is a reasonable expectation of privacy. If the chat is in the VB Friends group chat, then potentially any of 270 group members could be listening. And in open Local Chat, theoretically anyone could be listening and rebroadcasting.
Those might be reasonable norms. Still, I think the nature of the topic matters. I think if Tiffany isn’t comfortable with the transcript of her chat published:
As for “Official MU Policy,” I hate to have to have the bureaucracy of that, but realistically it’s probably wise. I guess the course syllabus, and the start of meeting announcement, should specify where the conversation will be held, for example:
or
veyot 11:59 on 03/03/2015 Permalink |
I was the person who objected. Newton told us at the end of class that he was planning to post the transcript. (I should have spoken up right then of my concerns, but I didn’t.) But when I read the transcript, I realized that at the next class discussion, I would only listen, but not say a single word. So I told Newton that I thought that posting the transcript would prevent people from attending the classes.
Elle 15:09 on 03/03/2015 Permalink |
I agree with veyot. I was surprised at the end when Newton said the transcript would be posted. That is the first time that has occurred in SL for me. Yes, anyone could potentially post from any chat so it is something to be aware of. However I do think that a class should state in the initial announcement if transcripts will be posted and again at the beginning of the class.
Thinking about this after the class I realized I was considering not attending the next one and if I did go I probably won’t add much. That outcome seems counterproductive to having an open discussion of an interesting topic.
Newton 16:05 on 03/03/2015 Permalink |
Sorry everyone. The transcript of yesterday’s local chat has been removed. I notecarded the individual class participants with it yesterday.
In the future, if anyone decides to attend again, I’ll only send it by notecard to people who were actually at the class. If someone shows up late, they will not receive it and they will not be able to proceed with the class.
I do hope you come back on March 29 with some thoughts or that you’ll contact me privately with any other concerns about that particular class. Again, I very much apologize.
Let the policy discussion rage on!
Neeva 17:42 on 03/03/2015 Permalink |
What a great discussion. It always amazes me how much second-order learning takes place around the formal class. As a culture and a species we are currently debating and evolving norms around privacy on the Internet and in social media–and here we are in our little corner of the that Internet working through the same issues in a personal, hands-on way.
In a dynamic place like MU I think the most important policies are the policies you create for yourself and bring your interactions with others. In a teacher role, I’m reminded that people care about where their words and images end up. if I want to duplicate or publish to document and share the experience, making that clear up front is ideal. negotiating it during the learning isn’t bad either. In a student role, I think my policy will be to be generous and share my thoughts and works with other participants, to not to take myself too seriously, to keep it fun, and to be brave enough to make a lot of mistakes, both publicly and privately.
Tiffany Mosienko 19:49 on 03/03/2015 Permalink |
I really appreciate everyone who has taken the time to comment. At Izzy’s request I’ll clarify my point. I was, in fact, being rhetorical, and I was not trying to influence policy one way or the other on my own behalf as may now be clear. My personal view is that everything I do in SL may be broadcast widely on the internets, and my behavior is “adjusted” accordingly to a degree. We are all at different levels of learning in many different fields, inlcuding virtual identity, the topic at Cafe Sophistry.
Virtual spaces give us affordances (that is, agency, or the ability to act in certain ways we might not in the real world). That’s what those who push virtual worlds and technologies harp on. It is a basic tenet of technological determinism. Technology affords us this opportunity . . (to make an alternative University) . . . therefore . . . .we do it. But reknowned MIT anthropolgist-psychologist-author-technologist Sherry Turkle has taught that for every affordance a technology provides, there is a (perhaps equal and opposite) vulnerability that is created.
If MU is going to be an education space, it must be aware of the role it is playing by hosting such a space and setting down rules or affordances with sensitivity to the inherant vulnerabilities. “There are no rules – that’s the only rule” is a dangerous game because virtuality and reality are inexorably intertwined – as was discussed at Cafe Sophistry. I have not done a complete census, but its pretty clear that there are various levels of technical, aesthetic and emotional maturity present at MU. And that is great for diversity and certainly welcome. I am sure we all have great things to learn from each other.
SL policy is based on “community standards”. This discussion already references rules and regulations of the SL Terms of Service (TOS). MU must define its own community standards as other sims do, in order to be a viable enterprise. This will become abundantly clear when someone opens an “educational” “rape” “clinic” next to the surrogacy center, and begins “teaching” there.
My two questions were: does MU have a community standards policy (and yes, the suggestion is that yes, it should), and 2) in the event of an issue with teaching, learning and or otherwise existing at MU does MU “have my back” if a dispute should arise to amicably resolve those issues to the best of its ability. This is the role of an University administration.
We’ve come a long way in answering those questions already. At the challenge of taking myself too seriously as Neeva pointed out, it is possible that MU “cover its ass” by pinning a disclaimer on its stuff saying, “everything you do and see at MU is a community project, subject to some community standards, namely X,Y and Z. Everything you do and say here may become a photo, video, chat transcript etc in someone else’s art project on someone else’s blog, and subject to the rights and limitations of the laws and community standards of your federal, state and local, etc. Play nice. If you have an issue, please see the Provost’s secretary.”
veyot 20:53 on 03/03/2015 Permalink |
I am going to start making that collage with some ocean waves and all of us floating. And maybe I will play a toddler for a day to change my opinons about toddlers! .
Newton 07:51 on 04/03/2015 Permalink |
Glad to hear it Veyot – and really looking forward to seeing it! Hugs.
Izzy 03:23 on 04/03/2015 Permalink |
I shiver at the thought of MU becoming a rule-bound bureaucracy. My RL university drives me crazy in its conservatism. In one of my recent scoldings because another college felt one of our student projects was disruptive, the director of the school of art actually encouraged me to have students do their projects off campus where they could enjoy greater freedom.
I couldn’t believe he actually said that. But he was completely serious. Students have less freedom for art “experiments & improvisations” off campus than on!? What the hell is the university for????
kk, having duly vented, I think this “Edge Case” makes clear that we do indeed need a “Privacy” or “Disclosure” or something like that, policy. Rather than simply post something, we should create a draft, post it, and have it open for a comment period. We could either have a short comment period so as to get the policy operational ASAP. Or we could say that the draft will be policy until the comment period closes, and then have the luxury of a longer comment period.
I can write a draft myself if necessary. But perhaps Tiffany, you, or another person here, would like to try penning a draft. Whatever person or committee drafts it, we can post it here on MU/Talk and then solicit community comments. We can incorporate those comments in a revision and then have it be our policy.
Izzy 03:47 on 04/03/2015 Permalink |
ATM we’re thinking mostly about text transcripts. Will this policy want to cover photography also? I’ve always felt that avatars in public spaces were photographable. Perhaps we will want to regulate that? As far as I know, Garry Winogrand never got a model release from anyone.
Should our policy be any different, or give any consideration to the fact that we are avatars? So in Tiffany’s case, she’s made some degree of SL-RL linkage. In my case, I haven’t made any linkage to a living typist. So publishing a transcript or photo with Izzy’s words or likeness doesn’t implicate anything about any RL person anywhere. Does that make a difference? Or do avatars want privacy, not only with respect to their typist, but privacy or absence-of-publicness for the avatar’s thoughts and likeness?
Elle 06:10 on 04/03/2015 Permalink |
Linden Lab has an official Snapshot and Machinima policy:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Linden_Lab_Official:Snapshot_and_machinima_policy
So we are bound by that at the least restrictive. I’m guessing MU is the landowner for now, so could define permissions in the covenant if they are needed (like giving machinima permission on the land)
Personally I won’t want to make it more restrictive.
Newton 08:36 on 04/03/2015 Permalink |
Removing but mentioning the fact that it was local chat – I think what I would do in the future is to just make sure I get an answer from all participants, to the idea of sharing the post on the blog. The concept was that nobody really reads the blog, so it’s hardly all that public, but of course it’s publicly accessible.
The purpose of the class was an art class, but the sensitivity of the subject warranted more scrutiny in the matter for sure. Not all classes have that dynamic, and I think the organizer, as part of planning the course, should ponder privacy as the situation warrants and make agreements with the participants as discussed above. Common sense pending formal accreditation.
Newton 08:40 on 04/03/2015 Permalink |
“The blog” meaning my blog, not this blog!
Yves 05:37 on 04/03/2015 Permalink |
I would like to propose a possible solution to this dilemma.
I propose, a Transcript of Immaterial Sensibility.
Since our encounter was at 8am SLT Sunday last, I propose that we meet exactly 1 week later, at 8am SLT Sunday next. We will meet at the offices of MU/Creativity magazine at Maria-12, overlooking the waters of the Eleonora Slough.
On arrival, participants will perform the following actions:
1 – Shake hands and agree that any discrepancies were due to honest misunderstandings and not any sort of deception or malice.
2 – Each participant should bring 1 gold ingot and give it to me to perform the ritual. I will bring a hard copy printout of the transcript of our discussion.
3 – I will burn the transcript.
4 – I will take the transcript ashes and the gold ingots and throw them off the edge of the MU/C studio, down the Eleonora Gorge, and into the waters of the Eleonora Slough below. (I may keep some of the ingots as an artist’s fee for performing this action)
5 – We will declare the waters of the Eleonora Slough to be a Zone of Immaterial Transcripts.
6 – We will depart.
Elle 05:44 on 04/03/2015 Permalink |
LOL! Then there is that approach. 😉
Tiffany Mosienko 17:57 on 04/03/2015 Permalink |
@ Izzy: I guess I sort of talked myself into a corner there! OK I’ll try to have something on the weekend
@ Newton: common sense is so elusive and very different for individuals of different cultures
@ Elle: yes, we are all bound by LL policies, but not everyone reads the rules, or has any expectations that others have
@ Yves: I do believe the mistakes were honest. I didn’t get the feeling of malice, just a differing set of agendas for the individuals in the group
@ all: it is not my intention to have a complex bureaucracy or technocracy, it can be very simple, and no matter what the rules are, people will either follow them or break them. This is more of a discussion about self-governance, and why that might be important. We bring into the virtual realm what we know – we must, because its all we can do. Virtuality can take on new forms, however, virtuality almost always most closely resembles what we have in the real world, to a degree, because without those “hooks” into reality, we’d be completely lost.
Izzy 19:07 on 04/03/2015 Permalink |
Wow Tiffany, your final @all statement is fantastic! Not simply about this issue, but about virtuality! haha, I complained your initial post was written a bit densely, but here in a single paragraph you’ve explained so many different things, and even a path to the future! 😀
In The Age of Spiritual Machines, Ray Kurzweil writes that “we want to solve our problems, but we don’t want to solve them all, too quickly!”
Tiffany Mosienko 15:25 on 08/03/2015 Permalink |
Medici University Community Standards (Draft Proposal)
Medici University in Second Life and on the web are bound by certain rules of behavior. All learners should familiarize themselves with the Second Life Community Standards policy: https://secondlife.com/corporate/cs.php which includes sections on intolerance, harrassment, assault, disclosure, maturity and (disturbing the) peace. Medici University in Second Life is a Moderate rated sim, and so no Adult activity is allowed. Since the purpose of Medici University is to create a learning community, behaviors and expressions ought to be of an educational nature. No vending as allowed by LEA rules (reference needed). Learners are encouraged to report any issue that contradicts these guidelines to the Provost. The Provost shall be the final arbiter of all disputes.
Nigger and Bitch I don’t like the words… | MU Talk 15:45 on 14/03/2015 Permalink |
[…] alarm, is harassment” also applies here. The Medici University Community Standards draft proposal http://mediciuniversity.co.uk/talk/there-has-been-a-kerfuffle-in-the-force/#comment-267 has not been widely discussed. But the implications of its importance are once again […]