The Story of My “Second Life”

Yankee and Euphloozie

Originally uploaded by kjarrett

Now that voice chat is part of the SL client, and it is expressly included in the setup steps when the software is installed, it was natural for all of our kids to enable it. Didn’t even occur to me that the Schome Park residents weren’t really using voice. So now that our kids are on the scene, microphones in hand, the fabric of the entire community seems poised for change – which is in some ways could be positive, and in some ways could be not.

On the plus side, voice will make learning things a LOT faster. It’s a lot easier overall to talk than type. And, let’s face it, accents are cool – the ability to hear each other’s voices is very exciting. I had two delightful conversations this morning, one pictured here, and another with Amba Sparker (both adult volunteers). Euphloozie’s kitten purred loudly into her microphone, which was great to hear (I love cats and miss our dear departed Misty a great deal.) I was happy to be able to have these conversations via voice and know that Euphloozie and Amba felt so, too.

There are many negatives though. First is the loss of anonymity. In the U.K., your voice is your calling card. It announces where you live, something like, here in the states, it would if we met someone from New York City. It’s just WAAAAAAAY more specific in the U.K., a person’s voice identifies their specific NEIGHBORHOOD, not just cities or states/regions. The social implications here are just enormous. Imagine being able to potentially know someone’s cultural heritage, level of family income, religious affiliation, perhaps even the school they attend – all from their voice.

The second big negative is environmental audio. As calming and pleasing as Euphlooize’s kitten purring was, I have heard plenty of unsettling things in the background while voice chatting with others. Displeased family members, loud crashes from collapsing chairs, radios / televisions / telephones, you name it. Even the telltale “ping” when someone gets an IM, and the click of their keyboard as they are replying … just enough to tell you they are not giving you their complete attention. :)

The third big negative is the lack of conversational history and the absence of proof in the event of an AUP infraction or assault. “Logging Chat” just isn’t possible via voice. Like any community, Schome Park residents have unique personalities, and there are bound to be some that don’t mix well. It’s happened before and will happen again. I’m just concerned that voice will make it harder for everyone to control.

Perhaps there are ways to have the best of both worlds … could we designate areas where voice chat is welcome, and others where only text chat is allowed? Then, by simply going to (or avoiding) certain areas, people could self-select. But what about the negative implications of that? What if some people choose to never use voice? Will they be treated or perceived differently?

I am looking forward to our community’s response to the use of voice. It’s going to be extremely enlightening…

-kj-