I was listening to the newest Drax Files Radio Hour show (find it here) and some of the comments near the end caught my attention.
There’s been a lot of talk about education in Second Life – the Virtual Worlds Best Practices in Education is being held from April 9-12 (that’s this weekend, for those of you who are calendar-challenged). However, it wasn’t the talk about education that caught my ear, it was a comment about the reputation of Second Life itself. It seems that Second Life doesn’t have a great reputation.
According to Drax and his guest (whose name I didn’t catch), if someone has heard of Second Life, they have negative associations with it. I wondered, why is that?
I understand why Second Life can/would have negative associations for some people, but is it true that SL has such a bad reputation? SL is filled with wonderful people, artists, builders, creators – have just a few bad apples ruined the whole barrel?
Am I missing something here?
I heard a comment (I can’t remember where) recently about there being a ‘hierarchy’ of acceptable activities, and that people view RL activities as more acceptable than SL activities. I understand that SL is not RL. But does that automatically make things that happen in/via SL as somehow ‘less’?
For example, you play a game of tennis (or soccer, or cricket, or whatever) with your friend in RL. Socially acceptable. You do the same thing (play a game with your friend) using a PlayStation, Xbox, or whatever gaming system you choose (with you and your friend physically in the same room). Socially acceptable. You do the same thing, only your friend moved to Scotland, so you play online using the PlayStation, Xbox, or whatever. Socially acceptable. You do the same thing, play a game with your friend (who now lives in Scotland) but do it via SL. Suddenly it’s no longer socially acceptable?
Is that true?
Do you share with other people that you are in SL? Why or why not?