Peering Inside: Rewards and recognition
Over the years, Linden Lab has put a lot of effort into attempting to reward, or to give recognition to (another kind of reward, really) Second Life users who made positive contributions to the overall user-experience. The Lab staff used to refer to it as a mandate or as a part of "their charter."
So far, almost all of these efforts have fallen a bit flat. By flat, we mean flat at the bottom of a deep hole. A deep hole full of explosives.
While it can't be said to be entirely the Lab's fault, if there was an award for having the opposite effect to that which was intended, the Lab would definitely be 'taking home the gold', as they say.
The Lab generally seems to operate these programs in a fire-and-forget fashion, apparently lacking the commitment and resources to maintain ongoing contact. Some of these have been coded into complex systems that are difficult to update and change as surrounding circumstances evolve.
Originally, for example, the dwell/traffic system was intended to reward users whose places within Second Life were popular by improving search rankings and by providing financial incentives.
In the face of the ingenuity and cunning of the average user, these systems became increasingly useless, long outliving any benefit to the average user -- resulting in the withdrawal of financial incentives, and then the planned removal of the contribution to search rankings.
User ratings, likewise, allowed users to be positively or negatively rated in a number of categories, generating both prestige for the user and, again, financial incentives. Applying ratings points cost, but the financial benefits of receiving them were ongoing.
Users quickly turned to ratings parties, where everyone rated everyone else positively, and basked in the extra income. A determined user could easily acquire as many points as they desired. Some Second Life mentors and volunteers refused to assist newbies if they didn't get a positive rating first. Some users would have 'neg-rating' raids, where they would gather a gang of users to reduce the rating of a chosen victim by applying negative ratings.
By early 2006, very few people who knew anything much about the ratings system paid much attention to the ratings of others -- usually only to their own. Even after financial incentives for ratings were eliminated, users still poured money into the improvement of their ratings.
If all that sounds like pointless chaos, well -- it pretty much was. The ratings system was eventually eliminated entirely. The Lab said it was to reduce database loads -- which it probably did, but the fact that the system was a major failure was likely also in the forefront of consideration.
Linden Lab's most successful program thus far seems to have been the Hippo Awards last year (aka the Linden Lab Innovation Awards), since the focus of that is on quite a narrow field.
Later today (about 90 minutes after this piece is published), Linden Lab's ex-chairman Mitch Kapor (still a member of the board of directors) will be speaking on Second Life as a disruptive technology, and making some sort of announcement of a program 'that recognizes the achievements of Residents in making Second Life a disruptive technology platform.'
Given Linden Lab's track-record with these programs, we're not expecting anything life-changing or exciting. It wouldn't even be pessimistic under the circumstances to expect something that meets the same high standards of success as dwell or user-ratings.
It would be nice to approach the time of the announcement with an air of optimism, but we'll take the pragmatic wait-and-see approach. All will doubtless be revealed later today.
