There's an article on cnn.com that explores the phenomenon of griefing -- what it is, where it came from, and what to do about it. It opens with a bit about Anshe Chung's attack in 2006, which is how it's relevant here. The second paragraph has it that the Internet ' ... was to be a libertarian's paradise, where people could meet and form lasting relationships with other individuals from around the globe, free from the constraints of daily existence - all without having to leave their bedroom.'

The thing is, despite griefing, the Internet is all of that. I have personal experience with friends who have met partners and more online in just this fashion. Ultimately, what makes a griefer is summed up best in this Penny Arcade comic (adult language to follow). Anonymity + an audience = antisocial behavior. There's more to it than that, however, as many, perhaps even the majority of those online are not griefers at all. One must be of the mentality that causing harm to others is pleasurable. The Avatar Bill of Rights, mentioned in the article, is a first step toward quelling griefing behavior, but it tells us nothing about how to prevent it in the first place.

So, where does that leave us? SL still doesn't allow the average user to mount up a posse and hunt down a griefer with the purpose of banning him, and cries for help to LL aren't always heeded. Is it possible to cobble together some sort of groundroots response? Are antiscript sims the answer? Have you seen a method that works?

(via cnn.com)

Over at Your 2nd Place, Nobody Fugazi reports on a study by researchers at the University of Nebraska, tantalizingly titled Deception in cyberspace: A comparison of text-only vs. avatar-supported medium.

The results indicate that in the text-only chat environment, subjects who were deceiving their partner experienced higher anxiety levels than those who were truthful to their partner; however, the same phenomenon was not observed in the avatar-supported chat environment. This suggests that "wearing a mask" in cyberspace may reduce anxiety in deceiving others. Additionally, deceivers are more likely to choose avatars that are different from their real selves. The results also show that the use of avatars in a computer-mediated chat environment does not have an impact on one's perceived trustworthiness.

So the mainstream media and the overall blogosphere is having yet another negative reaction to the Second Life hype, and that reaction is expressed as ... you guessed it: Second Life Hype.

Who is hyping Second Life? The LA Times, CNN, Valleywag, the New York Times, Business Week, well ... everyone, just about, except apparently Linden Lab who don't seem to much care what press they're getting one way or another - and with good reason.

I'm going to take a leap of faith here and say that a great many of you read Penny Arcade. The rest of you can be forgiven for not knowing what it is, but you're missing out. Suffice it to say, PA is a webcomic which focuses on the game industry, and delivers both insightful commentary and hilarious hijinks. Ugh, I feel sick for having said that last bit, but let's soldier on.

It's also been well-established that PA is rightfully picky about the companies to whom they offer ad space. Money alone won't do it; they have to at least like the company and its product. Having your advertisement on PA's front page, then, is an achievement worthy of notice. I can't recall the last time I've read anything Tycho or Gabe have said about SL, though, so I'm curious about their thoughts on our favorite virtual world. Gabe? Tycho? Bueller?