Your2ndPlace

The Financial Times has the article, Real life intrudes on the virtual world, which might be worth taking a glance at. The premise is pretty straightforward, and has been something debated for some time:

"On the internet, nobody knows you're a dog," says one pooch to another in front of a computer screen, in the famous 1993 New Yorker cartoon.

In the online worlds of World of Warcraft and Second Life, you can be a dog, elf or an orc, and nobody knows you're a human.

But the desire to don a virtual disguise may now be waning. In some of the newest virtual worlds, people are happier being themselves. Avatars are accurate representations of their owners and a right-click of the mouse over their characters can reveal their real name, age and interests...

Avatars as an extension of real people is nothing new. My real world avatar is as public as it gets; the only thing that I haven't done is get my avatar name synchronized with my 'real name', and I'm unlikely to do that simply because it doesn't seem too appealing. I live an open Second Life which is not too much of a problem for me, but there are times when some anonymity could come in handy. We'll get back to that.

Avatars

The word 'avatar' itself is derived from the Sanskrit 'अवतार, avatāra', which traditionally means a physical manifestation of a higher being - but now it is becoming more popularly understood as a virtual manifestation of a human being. Like the root word, there can be many avatars for one being - a common belief in some parts of India, for example, is that Buddha was the 9th incarnation of Vishnu.

But what does it all really mean? It only means what we make it mean. I have alternate avatars, as most people I know do - for whatever reasons, they exist.

The Financial Times article describes less interest in the anonymity provided by virtual worlds and the Internet. It talks about connecting Facebook with Second Life (something already begun to a small degree). If there is an actual argument about Augmentation versus Immersion, the Financial Times article leans heavily towards Augmentation. On its face, the argument of augmentation versus immersion is silly: the time spent in a virtual world is the same no matter how you approach it and it is not 'virtual time'.

The truth is - it doesn't really matter. Immersionists, people who enjoy anonymity, are going to be OK as long as they are permitted the grace of anonymity. This means that they, too, have to continue to permit themselves anonymity by not abusing it. Augmentationists, people who link the real and virtual worlds with their avatars, can continue doing what they do as well. It isn't a problem. It really isn't.

There is a rub. For obvious reasons, people whose avatars are linked to their real world personas get more press. Most of the time, sadly, those articles do seem like advertorials instead of actual articles - and there is a lot of room for criticism in that area. Still, there is enough space in a virtual world to allow for the anonymity that we all crave at times, be it through an alternate avatar or simply not linking who we really are to our avatars. That is perfectly fine.

Because of the obvious bias in media coverage, I have to disagree that anonymity is any less treasured than it was a year ago, 5 years ago, 10 years ago or 20 years ago. Certainly, the value of being known for the right reasons is a great asset - but it comes at a cost, as some people also seem to take great pleasure in sniping others for no valid reasons. Benjamin Duranske is the most recent addition to that club, as an example - and it ties into something which most people forget about the Internet:

The Internet Does Not Forget.

In Daniel J. Solove's The Future of Reputation (which I reviewed), many real world examples of how reputations can be adversely affected through the Internet are discussed - and virtual worlds are really no different since they are a part of the Internet. In it, one can read how information provided on the Internet can affect employment, contracts and other things - and people can be completely unaware of the information which is available on them. Imagine applying for work and someone uses a search engine, finds your name associated with someone's personal attacks and decides that you're not worth hiring? This has happened. Imagine a woman who doesn't clean up after a dog on a train being considered important enough for a Wikipedia entry - it has happened; look up 'dog poop girl'.

Our actions echo in cyberspace, be we anonymous or not. 'Celene Ballinger' apparently felt this recently and tried to clear her reputation. In Second Life businesses, calls for more transparency are slowly being met after Ginko Financial's failure. Imagine what would have been said on the Internet if the avatar 'Nicholas Portocarrero' had his real name out in the open: It is quite unlikely that anything nice would or could be said. While Ginko Financial is a sore point for many, it is also understandable that the real person behind it may have been a youth given enough textbook knowledge and rope to hang himself and others with - does he deserve a life depleted of opportunity because of it? Some would say yes. Some would say maybe. Few would say 'no'. Still, when one's reputation is on the line it is amazing how perspectives change. It is easy to be critical when one thinks one is untouchable.

The mixing pot containing those that prefer anonymity and those that do not is not changed too much aside from those less anonymous becoming better known (and people find that surprising!). But how we deal with the mix is really the issue here, something which people involved in Second Life businesses are quite aware of. Unfortunately, that will take time, examples and perhaps even a few lawsuits related to libel.

The trouble is that those who are anonymous cannot go to court without losing their anonymity. Perhaps part of what we see in virtual worlds today is how much people are willing to take to preserve their anonymity.

And perhaps some psychiatrists are necessary to remove the superhuman powers some avatars believe that they have.

Technorati Tags: Business Culture Law Metaverse Miscellaneous Op/Ed SecondLife anonymity internet 3d reputation virtual world virtual reality avatar