Our Two Cultures with apologies to C.P. Snow

[Kaseido_Quandry]

Even the "best service" heuristic requires us to at least put forward a clear definition of and criteria for good/better service. Until we do that, aren't we comparing apples to oranges?

I agree that those definitions are important, but I think they're a far distant second to asking the question, "does this provide valuable and efficient service?" regardless of the definition. As long as we're in the realm of fruit, either apples or oranges should do just fine.

Focusing efforts on questions of quality service would seem to be a vast improvement over what smells to me like a culture of entitlement, that somehow the CDS veteran political caste feels *entitled* to my tier payments to sustain their favorite forms of entertainment, bureaucracy and disputation, while regarding expenditures that might be a return to me of community services as the first thing on the chopping block.

[Claude Desmoulins]

Claude, I think this would be an ideal topic for an inworld discussion group, or salon of sorts. I'd enjoy sitting down with you, Pat and anyone interested, in a public forum, and going at this. It's an interesting topic, and I think we all bring some pretty solid thought and expertise to the issue

.

I'm game. Not sure when we could schedule it, but we'll try to sort something out.

I don't think it's that material to questions of purpose and accountability, and to no small degree I think - and think many in AA would agree - that quibbling over structural and procedural minutae is not part of a solution to CDS's shortcomings, but in fact one of its most serious ones.

As you've all probably seen, my perspective's more informed by business than politics. Even so, I think this simple heuristic is an excellent substitute for a detailed structural critique: for any given aspect of the CDS, simply ask - does this provide the best service to the people who are paying for it, at the most reasonable cost in time, money, annoyance and intrusion?

My sense is that those from the two different traditions (CDS/ AA) may in fact have quite different views about what does and doesn't add value to the virtual world experience. This now strikes me as the first key difference in understanding that we need to explore.

Despite appearances, CDS does not have a limitless appetite for minutiae. If it did, we would still have the 160 page judicial procedure that was drafted in 2006. If it is any comfort, even the politically inclined of the CDS have limits

[Aliasi Stonebender]

My sense is that those from the two different traditions (CDS/ AA) may in fact have quite different views about what does and doesn't add value to the virtual world experience. This now strikes me as the first key difference in understanding that we need to explore.

Despite appearances, CDS does not have a limitless appetite for minutiae. If it did, we would still have the 160 page judicial procedure that was drafted in 2006. If it is any comfort, even the politically inclined of the CDS have limits

If I can just spin theory for a moment, it reminds me of the whole "augmentation/immersion" split said to exist in SL. That is, there are whose who are basically themselves, just in Second Life with a cutesy username... and those who really try to live a second life, a different persona. Obviously, people are not exclusively one or the other - I've been involved with several roleplaying groups, for example, but for the most part in personality the Aliasi you get online is the Aliasi you get everywhere, just in different shapes.

I don't think it would be fair to paint the two cultures as one or the other, but I believe the split here is of a similar nature as you do.

[Jamie Palisades]

I strongly agree with Claude there. "Best" means nothing without "best for what?"
What do we want government to do, in a little virtual village like CDS?
Pogroms to amuse the plebes? Panem et circenses? Montagues vs. Capulets every 6 months?
Podiums for those who love to given speeches?
Cultural programs?
Keep the prim litter cleaned up?

For what it's worth, when I was in government here, I thought it was mostly #3 and #4. Regards JP