The Question of Player Status in World of Warcraft

By Bryan Tu Tran, Claire Hayati, Rebecca Lin, and Hank Whitson

Inside every server of World of Warcraft (WoW) there exists an eclectic community of players from all over the planet who participate in a complex cultural system where co-operative dungeon raids, gladiatorial duels, and constant multi-channeled communication are just part of the daily grind. Yet in a world where such fantastic activities are mediated by an invisible system of intricate calculations, and every character is designated a numerical value, what, aside from the raw math, determines a character’s status? By examining four central aspects of WoW’s game play, including; race and class configuration, guild membership, participation in player vs. player combat (PvP) and role playing (RP); our study offers new insights concerning online impression building and the nature of interpersonal status in virtual worlds.

As in real life, a character’s race and class play key roles in determining status on WoW, having dramatic influence on both appearance and abilities. According to the well-known anthropologist Max Weber, there are three factors that may determine one's social status: Property, Prestige, and Power. We would argue that since property and prestige must be obtained by a player’s actions in-game, his character’s inherent power, based on the criteria of race and class, is of paramount importance.

In order to examine the social influence of a character’s class and race, we conducted research through extensive participant observation and gathered data through semi-structured interviews with participants in person, as well as online through the private chat function. A sum of 120 hours was spent inside of the game. Eight in-depth interviews were obtained from age 15 to age 48. Half of the participants were between the age 18-24 and two were female. These consisted of gamers who just started playing to veterans with at least three years of experience.
In WoW, there are two factions which are called Alliance and Horde. Inside the Alliance faction, there are five races: humans, dwarves, night elves, gnomes, and draenei. Inside the Horde faction, there are also five races: orcs, undead, tauren, trolls, and blood elves. Each race has its own background story as well as a unique appearance. Alongside the physical differences, are the different “racial traits” or special abilities or powers granted to a character based on its race. For example, the blood elf race has a passive magic resistance that reduces the chance you will be hit by spells by 2%. Another example is the racial trait of ‘shadowmeld,’ which allows Night Elves to slip into the shadows, reducing the chance for enemies to detect their presence.

The specific race of the character does have an effect on one’s ascribed status, comparable to the status which is fixed for an individual at birth. In this context, the ascribed status is embodied by racial traits which are given to the character upon creation. According to the interviewees with at least one level 80 character (currently the highest level attainable), racial traits play a crucial role in organized battles such as raids or arena matches. Because the special abilities granted by a character’s racial trait may give a desirable advantage, the preferred race is depicted with more social value. For example, the tauren race, which resembles muscular anthropomorphic bulls, are considered to make better warriors than other races because two of their racial traits: 1) “endurance” in which the base health is increased by 5%, and 2) “war stomp” which stuns the enemy for a small time period, are particularly useful in melee combat, where extra health and a few seconds to get in an extra hit can make all the difference.

In regards to the physical appearance of a race, interviewees who have just started the game would rather choose the more attractive looking races. However, they believe it is relatively insignificant when asked if it has any importance in relation to social status. According to the piece, “The Role of Friends’ Appearance and Behavior on Evaluations of Individuals on Facebook: Are We Known by the Company We Keep?”, “Online users can organize the information flow and enhance self-image by strategically selecting how and what to convey to the receiver” (Walther et al.). However, it is not necessarily true when applied to WoW. Players with more experience in the game tend to disregard the physical appearance and focus more on things that enhance power such as class specialization and racial traits. Appearance then only holds importance to newer players.

Among the different races in WoW, there are ten playable classes: death knight, druid, hunter, mage, paladin, priest, rogue, shaman, warlock, and warrior. Each class is drastically different from each other in that they all have unique abilities through their spells and skills. For example, the priest class is known for their healing abilities and the rogue class is recognized as the primary melee damage dealer because of their powerful attack abilities. Another crucial difference that distinguishes these classes from one another is their ability to wield different types of weapons and wear different types of armors. For example, the paladins, warriors, and death knights are the only three classes that are capable of wearing plate armor, which has the highest defense value. In addition, each character class utilizes unique resources and play systems to give each class a distinct feel. Rogues, for example, draw from a stamina gauge to perform attacks and accumulate combo points as they successfully land hits on enemies. One the other hand, priests draw from a manna gauge to cast spells that may either damage their enemies or heal their allies.

Given its drastic effect on character abilities, players are all but unanimous that class is the single most important choice to consider when creating a character. There is considerable debate however, about which class is the most powerful or important for group play. Most agree that classes who perform specialized roles, such as healers and tanks—characters designed to absorb damage from enemies to protect the rest of the party—are more important than damage dealing classes, which are plentiful. Priests, warriors and death knights were mentioned in almost every single interview. These classes tend to be more valued by the online community because they have more specific duties to fulfill in raids. Ironically, classes focused on dealing high amounts of damage-per-second, or DPS, tend to be the most widely played even though they are less ‘prestigious’ than tanks and healers. This may be accounted for by the fact that DPS classes tend to be more efficient at solo-play than healers and tanks, who enjoy most of their specialized, role-based prestige late in the game, when party organization is crucial for advancing.
Since multiple classes are able to fulfill different roles, there is considerable debate about which class is the best at its job, and frequent debates concerning the balance of power between classes. Blizzard Entertainment addresses these imbalances by adjusting a class’s abilities through the semi-monthly software patches released to fix bugs, and add new content to the game. When a class (or item, or race, or ability) is made stronger, players say that it has been “buffed,” while any weakening adjustments are referred to as “nerfs.” Another remedy that Blizzard Entertainment came up with is introducing new classes and races in expansion packs, to address shortages of certain character types. For example, the death knights were added in the recent Wrath of the Lich King expansion to address the scarcity of tanking classes. Consequently, the status afforded by class and race are constantly influx.

It is important to understand that the status afforded to race and class is contingent upon the player’s ability to fulfill the role they shape. On occasion, new players who do not want to deal with the trouble of building a character will purchase high-level, well-equipped characters from other players, despite Blizzard explicitly prohibiting the practice in their terms of service agreement. In most cases, the new player’s inexperience will betray itself through foolish mistakes in group play and net them an extremely negatively reputation, despite the prestige of their experience, and the strengthened attributes of their equipment, or property.
Regardless of how powerful a class is at a given time, a single player cannot hope to tackle WoW’s hardest challenges alone. Guilds are essential for high end game play, providing the support and connections necessary to take on the game’s greatest challenges. Although it does not affect a player’s external appearance as drastically as race, guild membership is prominently displayed under characters’ names in-game, and it plays a considerable role in establishing their reputation.
Blizzard devised guilds as the mechanism to ensure that a sense of community and social networking was present in WoW. Guilds function as support groups and friend databases in which a member is considered responsible for participating in guild activities, helping fellow members, and following rules set by the guild leaders. Guilds are especially useful for high level players and obtaining “achievements.” They are important to study because they provide insight into how relationships form between characters and how status relationships develop both amongst their members and in contrast to nonmembers. Based on the research on guilds performed by Chen, Sun, and Hsieh, we hypothesize that high-level guilds, also referred to as power-guilds, create a sense of community amongst their members and isolate outsiders. We tested our theory through participant observations and interviews.

Guilds in WoW are constructed by individual players and grow when other players join. Haris and Nardi say that guilds’ main “focus is [to collect] reliable players for advanced play” (Haris and Nardi). Each guild acquires a reputation and unofficial status based on the identity of its members. According to Chen, Sun and Hsieh “the percentage of avatars joining guilds [increases] steadily with avatar level”, (Chen, Sun and Hsieh). Low status guilds are not very selective; they tend to be more accepting of characters of all levels, classes, specializations, and races. Most do not have strict regulations, do not require much play time, and often do not have the same sense of community responsibility as other more powerful guilds. The size of the low status guilds varies between 30-200 people, but most of the smaller guilds are not as stable and tend to be less helpful to their players (Chen, Sun and Hsieh). High status guilds, on the other hand, are very selective, often requiring many interviews and applications to become a member. They also require large amounts of play time, sometimes forty or more hours a week, and implement strict rules.

Power-guilds collect players with high levels of skill and understanding, and therefore can become very insular, with their members rarely mingling with outside players. The players in such guilds rely on each other for any activity requiring multiple players, including raiding and making items for one another. Within a server the more powerful guilds can become famous and their players respected and well known by players in less powerful guilds. However, the well-known characters tend to keep to themselves and do not need to seek help from others not in their guild. Also these players are extremely hard to access to ask for help from non-guild members. The status of the guilds therefore creates a virtual boundary in which players are separated based on skill and guild association. With all the high-end, skilled players concentrated amongst themselves they are less likely to help less-skilled players to advance in skill or complete hard tasks in the game. This isolation controls which characters someone can play with and hinders access to the more challenging parts of the game. At the same time the skilled players are ever advancing and pushing the boundaries that Blizzard has created.

This separation between guilds and their players is one based on skills and understanding of the game. Within guilds it is not a requirement that in order to be in a high position one has to be more skilled than the others below. Guild hierarchies tend to be more about social relationships than ability. Once in the guild the only way to advance to a more authoritative position is through social connections. “Raider” is the only guild role based on playing skills (interviews). Within a guild there are two levels of authority that are similar to government roles. The top position is guild master, which can be reached only by creating the guild; any player can create a guild. The master has ultimate control over the guild no matter how powerful the other members might be. For example, the master has the right to kick out members, shut the guild down, take all items from the guild bank, and invite anyone into the guild. The next authority level is that of the officers, who have power to add or kick anyone out, have full access to all bank items, and can control who plays in which raid. The only way to become an officer is to be chosen by existing officers or by the guild master. Officers choose raiders to go on raids. Raiders have no authority over other players but do receive automatic preference to receive the best items and a guaranteed spot in raids. Raider status is achieved through merit and the player’s ability to be organized and effective (interviews).

Discrimination between guilds helps to separate people who are not in the same guild and at the same time brings people of the same guild closer together. The hierarchy and different status positions allow the guild to run smoothly, and despite these differences, companionship and friendship is readily available. Guilds create a WoW community that is much smaller than the entire server, thereby providing more opportunity for repeated interactions. Guilds also define and supply a method of approaching the WoW play experience, either technically or with greater social interaction. This, along with boundaries imposed by guild status, pulls together players of similar ability and “can be designed to create somewhat customized play experiences” (Nardi and Harris). By imposing responsibilities on players within the guild, a sense of real-world community develops.

Many of the guild members in power guilds actively play with each other for forty hours a week and constantly use voice and text chat. During these sessions personal information and daily updates are given, bringing the group together to share common interests and experiences that strengthen the relationships between guild members and can create long-lasting friendships. Without the guild structure these groups of strangers and intensive players would not be given the opportunity to come as close to other players and the game would not hold the same sense of reality (Nardi and Harris).

Character abilities and connections have significant influence on forming status in WoW, though few things have more impact on an individual player’s status than their personal skill. But while the dungeon raiding scene is rife with horror stories about reckless players whose mistakes wipe-out entire groups, and “ninja looters” (unscrupulous players who steal valuable items dropped by dungeon bosses without their party’s consent), status gained through Player-versus-Player combat (PvP) is solely focused on competition.

PvP takes a variety of forms in WoW. Certain servers are designated as PvP servers (as opposed to PvE or player versus environment servers), where players are allowed and often expected to attack characters of the opposing faction in zones regarded as contested territory. All servers have access to other types of PvP play, such as arena battles, a more formal system of PvP where players form teams and participate in gladiatorial matches against other teams. Finally, there are Battlegrounds: large scale, mission based skirmishes where one Alliance team and one Horde team compete by accomplishing various objectives.

To research status relating to PvP, we participated in the Warsong Gulch battleground; the first and only type of PvP combat available to low level characters. Our findings suggest that status gained in Battlegrounds is like a sandcastle built near the shoreline, as it is constantly being wiped clean with each new skirmish. In their article, “Where Everybody Knows Your (Screen) Name: Online Games as ‘Third Places’”, Dimitri Williams and Constance Steinkuehler cite “Players [ability] to enter a world in which success is based not on out-of-game status but on in-game talent, wit, diligence, and hard work” as one of the core appeals of MMO’s (Steinkuehler and Williams). Furthermore, they cite ‘a level playing field’ as one of the essential criteria for online games to serve as ‘Third Places’; relaxing social environments outside the work and home. There are many points where WoW wipes a player’s record clean. Character creation allowing players to build their legacies according to their tastes, and forgiving death penalties encourage player’s to take another stab at challenges they fail. Yet Battlegrounds seem to be the best example of this etch-a-sketch-esque cycle, giving players nothing but a blank score and an opportunity to do their best.

To examine the role of status in a PvP battleground match, one must first understand its mechanics. Warsong Gulch is accessible from any major city for all races, wherein the player enters a queue to join the next match. The majority of battleground matches are with pick-up groups, meaning the teams are randomly assembled from those waiting in a queue compiled from several different servers. A player from the Dragonmaw server could find himself with a mix of teammates from the Frostwolf and Blackrock servers. For these reasons it is unlikely a player will join a team with someone he had fought with in the previous match. Consequently, any respect or derision gained in the previous match is wiped clean. Depending on the time of day, queues take anywhere from two to twenty minutes. He has no status among his teammates when the match begins because they have no idea of his skills, save for speculation.

After joining a battleground, the 10-character team has two minutes to lay out basic strategies and buff one another—cast spells to increase damage, strength, health, and general survivability. Once the match begins, the two teams compete to capture the enemy flag and return it to their own camp three times to win. All basic strategies for Warsong Gulch involve three roles: a flag carrier, defense, and offense. The flag carrier, arguably the most important role on a team, enters the enemy camp and is the one who physically—in the game sense—brings the flag back to his team’s home base. Defense characters escort their flag carrier to and from the enemy camp; if the flag carrier is killed, the enemy flag is dropped on the ground and can be recaptured by the enemy. Offense engages the enemy team directly and prevents them from reaching their camp. If their flag is captured, the offense chases down the enemy flag carrier and kills him to restore their flag to its original location inside their camp. Players who fulfill their roles well are respected during the battleground match, and teams who play well gain honor—literally accumulate a PvP currency called honor that they can redeem for special items.

At the conclusion of a match, a chart appears showing the names of each participant, their level, class, damage dealt, health healed, and how many times they captured the enemy flag or recaptured their own flag after it was taken by the opposing team. The player’s status is summarized by the statistics displayed on this chart at the battle’s end. The player who dealt the highest damage or captured the enemy flag the most times is respected, and is thus granted a kind of high status, one that is supported by his apparent gaming skill, an inherent knowledge of the game that fellow players should aspire to. But this status is fleeting; even if the player lingers to look at the end game scoreboard, the battleground automatically closes within minutes and prepares for the next pair of teams to clash.

Given the brevity of each skirmish, players have little opportunity to form lasting impressions on their teammates, leading one to question if appreciable status is created at all. Juniper is a female college student who plays a level 80 character and participates in Battlegrounds almost daily, yet she rejects the notion that status in battleground PvP exists. “There is no status,” she insists. “You almost never have the same teammates again and you’re not going to remember them anyway. It just doesn’t work like that.” Her boyfriend Astrus, with two level 80 characters of his own, agrees: “I don’t think you’re going to find status the way you describe it, probably because they’re all random people, so you don’t feel that kind of connection—that mutual respect for people you do know.”

Etically, one could argue that the post-match scorecard conveys a degree of status on participants, but from an Emic point of view, status in battleground PvP is nonexistent, because one’s teammates are randomly selected and it is unlikely that they will be encountered again. Since many players are driven by the desire to compete in as many matches as possible, they leave the Battlegrounds without examining the score. At the same time, there are dedicated teams of players who enter the queue as a group, and conquer other teams with a combination of superior communication and rehearsed tactics. This practice is perfectly legal, but uncommon due to the large of amount of planning necessary, which is comparable to a guild’s preparations for a raid, but yields no experience or equipment. Consequentially, such teams are easily recognized and greatly feared by their competitors.
Another niche activity with considerable impact on player-to player perception is role-playing, (or RP). Throughout our experiences in WoW, we noticed, through conversations and remarks in public chat channels, that the general opinion toward RP and Roleplayer’s is largely hostile or disparaging. This strikes us as both curious and ironic considering WoW’s classification as a Role-playing game (RPG). Our examination produced a fascinating insight concerning the correlation between game design and player behavior.

Before one can examine the effects of role-playing on player status, it is crucial to appreciate the distinction between the class based mechanics that structure role-playing games, and role-playing as a multiplayer activity. As a gaming genre, RPGs use a combination of character-specific categories (in WoW’s case, race and class) and statistics (that gauge attributes like strength and stamina) to determine characters’ abilities and power respectively. As discussed earlier, a character’s race and class have the most impact on a player’s duties during group play in WoW. Therefore, from an etic perspective one might say that people are always playing a role of some sort when they play WoW together. However, the emic definition of RP refers to playing the game in an in-character fashion, where users chat and ‘act’ (through emote commands) as if they are their character, as opposed to their operator.

As with other types of social play in WoW, there are casual and serious role-players. Casual sessions tend to be more improvisational, with participants reacting to in-game events as if it were their reality. Serious role-players generally meet at agreed upon times to act out a storyline in game, and restrict technical discussions of game play to an Out of Character (OOC) chat channel. Serious RP sessions also do not usually take place in dangerous environments; nor are they accommodating of other players who try to jump in uninvited, since unplanned player deaths and arrivals can disrupt the story.

Once again, our research consisted of participant observation and several semi-structured interviews taking place in game and online via an instant messenger program. It is worth noting that Blizzard has taken a decidedly hands-off approach toward facilitating RP in WoW. While there is a matchmaking system and chat channel to help people find groups for PvP and dungeon raiding, the only feature deliberately designed to facilitate role-playing are designated RP preferred servers. Yet this designation does not require players to engage in role play, nor does it give role play any type of priority treatment. This makes sense given the subjective nature of the activity, but one of the first lessons we learned about RP in WoW, is how difficult finding a session to participate in can be, even on a RP preferred server.

Currently, the most used chat channel in WoW is the Trade channel, accessible in each of the game’s capital cities. As its namesake would suggest, the channel is intended for players to conduct business, allowing players to advertise their wares or request goods. Since it is visible to every player in the capital city and moderated only by player complaints, Trade is frequently used for general chat and by role players searching for groups, much to the chagrin of actual traders whose chat logs are crowded with unrelated information.

During research, we witnessed a particularly passionate argument arise when two players started to role-play in Trade chat as if they were bartering in the game world. The traders, frustrated by the extra chat, lambasted the role-players who cited the game’s role-playing status. Without any official statement from Blizzard awarding precedence to the RP status of the server or the functional purposes of the Trade channel, the matter is left up to players to determine. In his article, “Beyond Management: Considering Participatory Design and Governance in player Culture” , T.L. Taylor notes that “Players are not merely consumers of games, but actively contribute to their creation,” and goes on to detail the numerous ways players voice their opinions to game designers, citing one example of an in-game protest about the warrior class that occurred WoW (Taylor). It is interesting to note that when the protest began to affect game play, Blizzard was quick to respond with a message threatening “actions against user accounts.” In the instance of the great Trade channel debate, those opposed to RP suggested that the issue be settled with a vote and claimed that the server was no longer RP preferred according to the results. Proponents of RP argued that the verdict had no ‘official value’ since it was unsanctioned by Blizzard and that the issue was not up for debate. Other parties argued that RP should only take place at specific locations in game.

The discussion gradually died down, though many comments from both sides of the debate suggested that it was a common topic of discussion, and that it would not be the last. Given Blizzard’s prompt and serious response to the warrior protest, it seems curious why the matter of RP in trade has not been laid to rest. Though having identified character class as a primary component of a player’s power over, and status within the game world, it seems reasonable to assume that it was given much higher priority than issues pertaining to RP, which has a very insignificant influence on game mechanics.

It seems that the functional goal driven mechanics seem to stifle the social aspects of the game crucial to role playing. This observation is consistent with Williams and Steinkuehler’s findings, which concluded “As complex, long-term collaborative activities become increasingly prevalent [in MMOs], the game becomes increasingly more entangling, time-consuming, and work-like, diminishing its status as a relaxing social environment,” (Steinkuehler and Williams). Having no place to belong to, we expect role-players to feel frustrated or alienated by the generally hostile tone toward their activity.

Yet during our interviews, most role-players stated that they were indifferent or amused by the debates. “It’s easy enough to ignore people online,” said Silver, a level 78 Paladin, “but I think it’s kind of hilarious that you have these people calling us geeks while they’re here in our world, trying to sell virtual dragon teeth.” Hornz, a high level Gnome Mage who had role-played in other MMOs explained that he did not play in WoW because most role-players seemed inexperienced. He actually felt that the debates on Trade were good, because they served to help weed out less dedicated players: “The ones who get upset are usually just trying it [RP] on. If they like it, they keep at it. If not, it really isn’t for them anyway. I don’t roleplay on WoW because there are too many of those people here.”

When asked about their primary motivations for engaging in RP, most interviewees cited creative expression, immersion in the game world, or a mixture of both. Surprisingly, none of the subjects cited socializing as a primary motivator. Silver observed that RP could make it harder to socialize with other gamers, due to the fabricated personalities players adopted for their characters. Another player, Sage, suggested that role playing does not necessarily need to be a strictly multiplayer activity, feeling single person activities such as Machinima, which use the game world to create movies, constituted role playing as well.

Overall, one’s status in WoW is primarily focused on a player’s power. Classes and races enjoy prestige based on their abilities to help parties achieve specific goals. Power guilds serve as an extension of such practices, fine tuning their ranks to take on the greatest challenges the game has to offer. By contrast, status gained through participation in RP and PvP is largely unrecognized, since the personal satisfaction afforded by such pursuits cannot be precisely quantified by the game’s system. Ironically, even though the interactions of online games occur in virtual worlds which we navigate alone from our computers, there is a strong emphasis on tangibly increasing one’s power, and working with others to achieve great things.

Khuyen Lam

Brian Tan

Victor Shen

Gloria Law

Cyber Mobs

Prelude

When we found our first informant through a message board, I asked him if he could answer my questions regarding “trolling.” There was a long pause until he finally responded:

“Interview me is your first step. PayPal me twenty-dollars is your second step. Getting an A is your final step. Trolling is an art it's hard to explain... It's like robbing Van Gogh when he is in the Denny’s bathroom. Trolling is a form of expression like dance or writing music. The fanfare is to make people feel like they're meaningless.” After that, we knew the project would be a long and arduous affair.

As the internet grows increasingly relevant in our everyday lives, it is important to understand the phenomena and cultures it is cultivating. One particular interest that our group decided to focus on is a behavior called “trolling.” The description of this nature is debatable, but through participant observation, interviews and research, our group was able to understand that this cultural scene resulted from “renegades” of these internet communities who disrupt and harass other users for amusement and/or notoriety.

What Counts As Trolling?

While setting down the basic outline of our research, our group often had trouble differentiating between different terms. Words such as “trolling, griefing, flaming, and spamming” are thrown around and used interchangeably at times which made it difficult to conduct research. Also, it was necessary to establish a common language to be used for interviewing. Prior to this, every time someone was interviewed about trolling, we had to first verify that their idea of trolling matches our description. This was a slow process; we often had to stop so that the person being interviewed could explain why each term meant what it meant to them. It was necessary to define trolling for the purpose of our research in order to expedite the process of gathering data. Prior to the interviews I would explain that regardless of what each term meant to them individually, we would be using the term in this particular sense.

Even though we established a common definition for trolling, we still asked what trolling meant to each person. The results often held true to our assumptions: trolling is when someone makes a post that is outrageous, hoping to get a rise out of other users for their own enjoyment. The targets vary, and the troll’s methods vary, but generally it’s making other people angry so that the troll can laugh at them and feel superior.

Oftentimes, the targets are “anybody who falls for it easily.” According to the people doing the trolling, these people are usually newbies to the site, of lower intelligence, have a superiority complex, or are trolls themselves. As one informants said, “Most of the time I am trolling I am doing it because I am bored and need something to do to amuse myself. I pretty much target anyone who displays a weakness which I can capitalize or is in a situation I can manipulate.”

Despite of what the informant above stated, however, there was a surprising find: trolls often troll other trolls.This makes trolls quite different from your typical playground bullies: instead of a group of trolls banning together to pick on a single person, many trolls explicitly expressed their distaste for ganging up on a single target. The trolls I interviewed did not like working together with other trolls and most enjoyed trolling trolls the most. When I asked why they did this, I had expected them to respond that it was fun as long as they felt like they were getting the better of someone else. However, the responses were overwhelmingly about status. These trolls trolled other trolls because it gave them more satisfaction to compete and win over an opponent of a similar level and mindset.

However, when I asked one person to clarify how this could be done, there was no distinct answer. Apparently, not knowing is fine as long as you think you’ve the upper hand and its fun. Thinking more on this issue, trolling trolls could very easily become an endless cycle, since so many different kinds of responses could be categorized as trolling. Troll A could post as a pseudo-naïve character, asking an outrageous question and expecting serious responses from people who don’t “get it.” Troll B comes in and tries to Troll A by responding in a furious and completely serious manner. Troll A will then respond thinking that they’ve found a sucker, and the cycle could continue forever. How would you know that you’ve won? For this question there was no distinct answer.

The question of when trolling occurs was met with some rather unexpected answers; I had originally meant the question to ask for specific times, such as right after someone tries to sound smart in a forum. However, those being interviewed took the question to mean something else and I realized my folly of expecting trolls to need a reason to troll. Most trolls troll when they are bored and want to have fun by messing with other people. Only one person interviewed said that they kept a specific alternate avatar strictly for trolling. Some troll only when they come upon someone who seems like an easy target, and will easily take offense, or there was already an ongoing troll attack that they choose to join in. Others purposely go looking for victims when they have time to kill, or start new threads in forums with outrageous headings to bait people into responding. Sometimes these trolls spend hours of their day continuously feeding this thread.

Contrary to what trolls would like to believe, their victims are not really offended for long. While trolls feed off of angry, excited responses, oftentimes once the victim realizes that they’re being trolled most of their anger dissipates. Rather than staying offended, most victims are just embarrassed that they fell for what the troll said as truth. Once it is clear to these victims that their attacker was just trolling for fun, and that they didn’t really believe in the things they said, they leave the thread quietly. I feel that this is the best and only thing people can do, since trolls get their laughs from making you post angry rebuttals.

Yes, there are still victims out there who know that they were trolled, but they are still deeply offended. These people tend to be perceived as taking things too seriously, and that only leads to be trolled even more.

Since websites thrive by having more people on it and using it, I was concerned over whether or not trolling would cause major damage. In theory, once there were enough trolls to hinder most people from using the site, the website would slowly die as more and more people leave. Most of those interviewed denied this would happen, including several victims. Trolling is not meant to incur real damage, and those who troll really believe that they’re not doing anything wrong. Even though their actions lead to their victims feeling less about themselves, trolls truly believe that they are righting the world with what they do. Alternately, when I asked whether or not the activity of trolls seriously hindered the intended activity on the website, most of my interviewees agreed that it did and that it was a real danger to the website that trolls were getting in the way.

Where Does Trolling Occur?

With the development of the internet, it has evolved into separate clusters, each with a multitude of forums where relevant topics may be discussed. As these hubs for information have flourished, so have those who would subvert these communities. Trolling is a text based harassment that has found a home primarily with in forum communities; however, not all forums, also called boards, experience this plight.

For trolling to occur, some basic requirements exist: the community must have a focus on text based communication, the community must also have the freedom to express themselves fairly openly without too much restraint (i.e. not predetermined responses), and it is typically large enough to have a degree of unfamiliarity between all the members.

By our definition of “trolling” as opposed to commonly seen negative behavior (i.e. griefing or flaming, etc.), we have determined that the desire to psychologically or emotional attack someone exists in text based communities, as other forms of interaction would add other incentives for this negative behavior. Without the freedom to express a person’s ideas we would not see the behavior we call “trolling” as with predetermined responses and created to limit the amount of communication and are generally geared toward a productive and positive community where negative behaviors and impulses are shunned.

Lastly, for the behavior we “considerer” trolling to apply a degree of unfamiliarity must exists between those involved. When this personal barrier does not exist, we see many of the negative aspects taken in a different light; such as an inside joke. When these comments and behaviors are treated in a humorous light, we no longer see the “attack” that we have defined trolling to fall under, so we do not treat those comments as instances of “trolling”. This is reminiscent to a passage Jeniffer Mnookin wrote in a publication concerning the emergence of law in one of cyberspace’s first virtual worlds, LambdaMOO: “Remember, LambdaMOO is supposed to be fun. It's a game. Can't we all lighten up a bit?" A lash-back to new rules enforced by the administrations of the game, due to text-based harassment.

So long as these requirements are satisfied, trolling tends to exists in these communities; however, the frequency of trolling and whether or not trolling flourishes in the community have plenty of other markers. As trolls differ from one to the next, it is impossible to properly grasp each trolls habit; however, there are a few common situations in which trolling tends gather towards.

Seeking to incite responses out of a community, trolls tend to find a niche in forums that have strong feelings or forums that tend to have a bias regarding something. This “something” is vague precisely because it appears that forums for almost every topic exist somewhere on the internet; this “something” can range anywhere from gaming opinions, political views, religious beliefs, etc. A common method trolls use to incite a response in these situations is to simply place a comment or post that is opposed or opposite the general bias of a forum; many users that are associated with the forum will quickly reply to demonstrate their views and this situation is perpetuated. Another common situation that allows trolling to occur is the “question forums”. These forums are generally utilized for help in certain questions and the trolling of these forums has split into two broad categories: deserved or underserved. Underserved trolling applies to trolls who purposefully give useless advice (i.e. “Do a barrel roll!”) or comments merely to insult and put down the help seeker; this type of behavior is generally not accepted nor appreciated by most communities.

Deserved trolling applies in a narrowly defined margin, where trolling is applauded and appreciated because the question may have special circumstances attached to it; such as, questions that are forbidden to be asked as stated in the rules of a forum community or else questions asked for so often that a special post or sub-forum may exists to handle inquiries of those type. Trolls that attack these questions are accepted because it is perceived that members of the community that fail to conform and follow the rules are detracting and hindering the community. These two situations have developed into natural attractants for trolling behavior; however, just as there are natural attractants for trolls, some communities present a natural deterrent for this behavior based upon its structure. One prime example is smaller internet communities. As previously stated, trolls are more prevalent the larger the community. This reason cannot be solely attributed to the odds of interacting with the same members, because of open registration the ease in which a troll can create and “alt,” which means alternative accounts, for negative or positive purposes does not account for the absence of trolling on smaller communities. In some ways, it alters the presentation of an individual. In Nick Yee and Jeremy Bailenson’s writing, they posed the question: “Virtual environments, such as online games and web-based chat rooms, increasingly allow us to alter our digital self-representations dramatically and easily. But as we change our self-representations, do our self-representations change our behavior in turn?” The anonymity and “appearance” that was created for the sake of trolling most likely influences the attitude and behaviors of the individual.

Another heavily prevalent factor that helps maintain the level of trolling that appears upon various internet communities is the interactivity of the administration with the regular members of the community. In online forums where the administrators are not shadowy overlords dictating rules and presenting penalties, but utilize the forum as it was its original purpose, the sharing of ideas, those forum appear to have the least trolling activity. The two most plausible reasons for this lowered trolling activity are either the moderators are constantly dealing with the trolls as they will come across them in their own forum use, or trolls in such communities do not exists because of the fostered good will between all members and staff that appears to be created. Trolling appears to permeate all internet communities in a shape or form; however, trolls are far from the random attacks, rather they have a governing method.

Methods

For our original research, we used two methods to intimately understand trolls and trolling behavior. Initially, we interviewed three individuals with whom one of our team members are friends. Through these connections, a level of trust had already been established, so we sent a preliminary set of open-ended questions for the individuals to respond to via instant messaging. Since the questions were grouped together, the respondents answered our questions very quickly like a questionnaire. Also, there was little opportunity to immediately follow-up on their responses. Unfortunately, none of them have responded to our second set of questions which were composed to gather more in-depth responses. Our team member speculates that the friends did not perceive our research project to be serious work.

Secondly, we analyzed the text of an online forum where trolling occurs to better understand the context of these incidents. We briefly looked at the layout of the messages and the thread hierarchy of the website along with the additional features the forum might have such as indicators regarding the popularity of a particular discussion. Then we inspected the semantic organization of the website and compared its intended forum discussion topics to the messages posted on the forums. We identify the troll message as one that is completely off the topic of discussion or the topic of the moment that evolved from the leading thread. From the posting of the troll message, we read the responses proceeding it. Some of these messages were addressed to the troll, while some later responses were reactions to them. However, there were responses that were ambiguous to whom they were addressing.

Also, we attempted to contact trolls and a few respondents through the forums via the private messaging feature if it was available, which is usual on forums that require an account name. Unfortunately, after introducing our research project to our prospective informants, they did not respond. We speculate that they ignore the private messaging notifications for a few main reasons. The first major reason is that the message received notification is not displayed prominently when the user logs on. There was probably no improvement on this feature because it is rarely used. Second, the users may have read our message, however they may have felt that our message was off topic to the discussion. Some may have wanted to forget about the trolling incident and allocate their efforts towards their interests at the forum. Third, we did not gain enough trust with the informant despite guarantees of anonymity. Since we recently created new accounts at the forums, we may not have established enough of a reputation to identify ourselves beyond our message. With a lack of reputation around the forums, our intention for interviewing trolls may have seemed suspect. Lastly, the user may only created the account for a particular set of purposes: to troll or respond to trolling. Also, some users set up an account to troll over a set period time and then abandon it. So the user may not have seen our message at all.

It is difficult to define distinctions among flaming, griefing, trolling. Due to the growing popularization of Internet access and increasing unique users joining online forums, the definitions among flaming, trolling, and griefing have very little precision that distinguishes them from each other. This occurs as a result from the recent emergence of these phenomena, the lack of a central authority to define such a recent activity, and the multiple understandings of hostile online behavior. Although Wikipedia seems to emerge as a center of authority regarding knowledge about recent phenomena, there is a pervasive lack of reflection on the methodology of their definitions. Since these terms are undergoing debate and still gaining a consensus on their precise meanings, we will attempt to outline some criteria that might distinguish these activities. Julian Dibble, a writer for the Wired Magazine, wrote, “Griefing, as a term, dates to the late 1990s, when it was used to describe the willfully antisocial behaviors seen in early massively multiplayer games like Ultima Online and first-person shooters like Counter-Strike (fragging your own teammates, for instance, or repeatedly killing a player many levels below you).” In some ways, trolling is a variation of griefing, except that it primarily uses a text-based form. The first criterion to consider is the number of participants involved in the activity. For all of these, the act can be performed by one user, but there can be a group of users that perform this anti-social behavior through signaling with the hostile message itself or coordinating outside of the site of the attack. Moreover, the number of those affected by the act should be considered. Flaming is believed to target only one user on a personal level, while trolling and griefing targets multiple users usually on an impersonal level. However, there can be cases where trolls and griefers seek to disrupt a particular user's experience throughout the site.

Next, the site of the attack should be considered. Flamers use many online channels of communication, such as chatrooms and e-mails, to attack the user. On the other hand, trolling and griefing seem be contained in a forum or graphical virtual world, respectively. The last criterion to contemplate could be the level of annoyance that the affected users experience. An attack from flamers appears to be inescapable as they send continuous amounts of hostile messages from as many channels as possible, which disrupts the user's ability to use those affected channels. Due to the impersonality of most trolling and griefing incidents, users can leave the certain parts of the site and ignore them. However, frequent repetition of those anti-social acts will decrease the appearance of social cohesion within those virtual worlds, and thus detract from their social utility.

More Trouble Shooting

A difficult issue that our research pertained to the subject matter; trolling is a behavior that is based off of wiles, mischief, transient users and deceit—many of our interviewees did not believe that we were being honest, and felt that we were trolls. In other cases, there were a lot of interactions that seemed fruitless. As one informant, nicknamed “AznSquirrel,” wrote, “You already asked me these. S-stop. I am n-not a troll. Who else are you going to ask these to? If they're a troll none of them will give serious responses.” One group member, who served as a field researcher, responded, “Like you?” After a short while, the informant began to cooperate and said, “Then.... they are not.... masters of the art. The art of "trolling." I only troll defensively or people I don't know. "The Art of Troll" ~ Tun (sic) Szu.” At which the researcher responded, “Alright, that’s enough.” It was difficult trying to cope with hours and hours of trying to find informants, and once that opportunity comes, the informant does not yield the results desired. However, after trial and error, we realized uncooperativeness was not necessarily “useless information,” as it is still a part of our data.

In some interesting situations, there were some interviewees who claimed they were trolls, because they were excited to have their names published in a paper. As one informant asked, “Will I be on this as KK5[1] or anonymous?” However, the researcher responded, “Sorry, but I don’t think it is ethnical for me to put your screen name on this. I have to cite you as anonymous.” The interviewee was disappointed and responded, “But I want to be on this as KK5.” Unfortunately, after this exchange, he ignored further follow-up questions. Again, while frustrating, this behavior was still a useful incite. Our perception of what was “useful information” or not was influenced by the fact that some of our group members had a myopic gaze, which means that some data that may be significant to a research might be lost because the researchers are already well-integrated in the field they are studying in. However, thanks to the use of detailed field notes, we were able to go over the data in detail.

It was interesting how there were some individuals who vehemently denied that they were trolls. While acting as a participant observer on a forum, the researcher noticed one member that acted extremely brash and insulted everyone on the forum in a ridiculous and exaggerated manner that resembled many other trolls she had previously interviewed. She sent him a private message and explained that she was conducting a research on trolls, and outlined in detail how he matched the description of a troll. However, he adamantly denied that he exhibited any behaviors. Before the conversation evolved into an argument, the researcher ignored him. It is unclear whether or not he did that because he wanted to troll our research, or because he honestly believed that the way he acted as fine.

Conclusion

Though the research was arduous, it was fruitful; however, because trolling is a modern phenomenon that is changing each day, we cannot ascertain that our definition of trolling and explanations for why it exists is absolute and universal. Arguably, we can make the argument that most individuals that engage in this type of aggressive and anti-social behavior are heavily motivated by jovial intentions, despite of the fact that their actions may seem extremely negative and brutish.

---

[1] This username is a pseudonym for the purpose of this research paper

Gustavo Esparza
Genie Luzwick
Alex George-Johnson
Joshua Liu

BUYING HABITS IN SECOND LIFE COMMUNITIES

The economy in the virtual world of Second Life (SL) has been receiving more attention each year since the birth of its existence in June 2003. SL has an internal currency, which is called the Linden dollar (L$), curiously looking like the abbreviation of Second Life backwards. Although this is probably a coincidence, it is not too outlandish to say that the economy in SL, run by Linden Labs, is one of the main drivers of the world’s popularity and evolution.

There are many different ways to make an income in this microeconomy. The easiest and most straightforward way is to buy Lindens with real money through PayPal. The current exchange rate of SL as of 3/16/2009 was L$262 for one U.S. dollar although it fluctuates between 270 to 300 Lindens. Another method is by “camping,” which is waiting for good to come to you rather than you going to get the goods. One can go seek out free virtual goods on certain SIMs such as the Freebie Warehouse or Vienna Freebies. Another huge way is through becoming an entrepreneur by; for example, starting your own Steampunk goggles retail store or Rollerskate store. You could get a wage laborer to manage your store when you are not present. You could also be that wage laborer. You could be a part of the, what some call it, unreal estate market by selling or renting land or houses like SL’s “Donald Trump,” Anshe Chung, who has already made over $1 million in assets in the game (Reuters 2006). The average profit as of 2006 has been “less than US$10 per month, and about 90 percent made less than US$200 a month” per person (Reuters 2006). So, one can see, for many, it is not a game to support the funds needed for one’s life. It is firstmost, a game.



Style

Overall people simply purchase in game what suits their style of avatar. One could easily go the entire time on Second Life and not put a single cent or Linden in this case, and still enjoy their experience. As discussed by Martin (2008) unlike some online communities and games, in Second Life, your avatar does not require you to satisfy any biological functions in order to stay alive, i.e. you cannot die (with the exception of battle simulator regions). “Virtual goods offer an exemplary case of this subsumption because they lack use-value and yet continue to be bought and sold at a rapid rate” (Martin, 2008). In other words, though not necessary in the survival of an individual’s Second Life experience, people still spend real life money on clothing and other trinkets. Like the people we talked to in our Second Life research, we too soon found out that though not necessary, buying objects for our avatars to wear and use makes the experience more interesting. In Second Life there are many areas with stores that hand out free objects not surprisingly called “freebies”. But to own something that you actually paid for with Lindens gives you a bit of a social boost. To have money in world, you either have to work for it, as in real life, or just buy Lindens, with real currency on the Second Life website. By doing so, it says something about your avatar and as a person in general. It makes a person less of a “noob” because it shows that they are more dedicated to SL by actually putting your money and time into it; and by doing so, you are buying more virtual goods to stand out more as an individual. Thus to fit in more with your group, be it furries, etc., one “[accomplishes] this task is through the purchase of smaller but no less significant virtual goods” (Martin, 2008). By buying objects that reflect an individual’s group in SL they not only look like what they want to be seen as, they become it.

“While buying a sailboat in offline life may allow individuals to associate themselves with sailing, it does not guarantee the skills necessary to safely take a boat out on open water. In contrast, buying a virtual scripted sailboat in Second Life allows the resident not only the feeling of being a sailor, but the ability to be one as well” (Martin, 2008).

Real Estate

Second Life can be a medium for individuals to achieve and own something they may never have a chance to in real life. One can easily own a mansion, a luxury car, a Picasso or two, etc, all for a fraction of the cost of one in real life. Property ownership in second life is a good way to show off an individual’s tastes and skills in building. Some people we talked to spend over thirty-five U.S. dollars a month to rent a plot of land in which to set up their virtual homes. “It is rare that individuals open their offline homes to anyone who wishes to enter, and yet virtual homes are frequently accessible to other users, if not the entire environment’s population” (Martin, 2008). Those property owners we met were quick to welcome us to their homes and happily give us a tour. They were proud to show off what they had spent their Lindens on, or what they had spent hours building. One person showed me their four story gothic castle, nicely perched on the side of a cliff overlooking the virtual sea. The plot itself was a generous 8,000 square meters large. The owner stated that in SL she has her own castle and a small forest, but in real life lived in a small two bedroom flat in the “trashy” side of Sydney. The scene she described reminded me of Hiro Protagonist from the cyberpunk novel Snow Crash, “Hiro has a nice big house in the Metaverse, but has to share a 20-by-30 in Reality. Real estate acumen does not always extend across universes” (Stephenson, 1992).

Almost everybody Second Life we talked to wanted to own virtual property in game, but affordability was the top reason most chose to remain vagrant. “About ten years ago, when the Street protocol was written, Hiro and some of his buddies pooled their money and bought one of the first development licenses, created a little neighborhood of hacklers” (Stephenson, 1992). One way which people get around the issue is to find friends with similar interests and goals in Second Life, and pool money to own land as a group. This requires that individuals trust each other enough to be financially responsible for their monthly tier (rental cost) contribution to the land. One person failing to pay their part can jeopardize the whole group which can lead to the reclaiming of their land by ether the land owner (whom actually owns the land, just rents plots within it), or the Lindens; thus loosing building rights on the parcel. Trust is important in these quasi-business arrangements, as there is no legal way to hold somebody accountable if they fail to pay their rent or in some cases, run off with the group’s pooled rent money. “It is likely that players in these encounters do not know one another. Players routinely offer unsolicited help to strangers as well as responding when asked… A collaborative atmosphere of “respect” for all players is a desired aim articulated by many guilds and reinforced as players help others, mindful of help they have received” (Nardi & Hariss, 2006). In World of Warcraft, as Nardi and Hariss discuss, helping others is a great way to form positive social bonds; the same applies to Second Life. One way that people help each other is to give another individual Lindens. One person stated that she gives “money to new players to help them buy avatar skins and shapes so they don’t look like such noobs and get treated better by other players who have been playing SL for a long time.” She also jokingly stated that she just didn’t want to see ugly avatars running around, but moved on to state that she found out that if she helped new comers to SL they would be her friends and in turn later help her out as well is she ever needed to borrow Lindens. Thus the golden rule is key to building strong social bonds; treat others as you would like to be treated.

Victorian Steampunk in Caledon

--“I think that novels that leave out technology misrepresent life as badly as Victorians misrepresent life by leaving out sex.” –Kurt Vonnegut (A Man without a Country)



To briefly explain what you are about to get into. Steampunk is a subgenre of fantasy and sci-fi that became popular in the 19th century. It is typically set in the Victorian era. It is set in a world where steam power is still widely used. This is what the world would be like if steam power won over electric power.
One thing I have noticed about this particular community in Second Life is its lack of sex-related paraphernalia. This fact allows for a more interesting pattern of buying habits. Don’t get me wrong, yay! sex, but seriously, it clutters the space. Anyway, in Interview 2 with Porkchops Chaplin, he told me that his most common purchases within SL have been brass goggles. If you’re not familiar with Steampunk culture, brass goggles alone can make someone be considered in steampunk attire because it is one of the culture’s main symbols in clothing. Porkchops went on to say that he also has purchased “airships and boots,” although “[he] makes a lot of his own stuff.” I asked him how long he’s been on Second Life, and he said about 3 years. This makes sense because it takes quite awhile to learn how to make excellent clothing. As far as my eye could see, he had a pretty dashing avatar. Going on with the interview, Porkchops explains that newbies typically buy “AVs [avatars], clothes, land, whatever the new fun item is.” K9 Bojangles, from interview 1, and Rosy Simondsen, from interview 3, thought that the most purchased item was clothing for avatars. Both K9 and Porkchops agreed that, although they do make some money in SL through mostly sculpting prims into objects, they do not make enough to cover their RL (real life) expenses. When asked if males or females purchase more items, several did not have answers, but Porkchops guessed that women spend more on clothes; however, he sees males purchasing quite a bit in Caledon as well.

K9, Rosy, and Porkchops all agreed in their answers that free clothing could be of really high quality and that one does not need money to survive in Caledon. K9 went on to give me a whole folder of landmarks (places to teleport) of the best freebies he has found during the 2 and a half years he has been playing SL. He explains that all his clothes are modified freebies and that he has only spent “$8 in 2 years… expert cheapskate.” The two items he bought with those 8 bucks was his fox avatar for $3.50 and MystiTool (which is a hud with a bunch of tools on it) for $4.00.
I did not get the best answers when asking random people why they chose Caledon as their place to live. Most of them respond with, “it’s a cool place,” which does not explain too much. However, maybe the concept is that simple. They found a cool place, and they stuck to it. If it’s working for them, why change it?
Sex in Second Life

The sexually active population traverses racial, geographical and age boundaries not challenged by the other clicks of the game. The only criteria needed are to be over the age of 18 (a parameter that seems to be poorly regulated) and be a participant in the erotic community. This participation comes in many forms. The bulk of my research came from interactions with those that actively participate in the marketing of various services, including sex and the selling of sexual products and animations. In asking a series of open-ended questions I found that the motivation behind many of the erotic dancers and virtual prostitutes varied greatly but their desire for income remained consistent. No matter how great their drive was to gain Lindens, the monetary unit in Second Life, their spending habits were consistent with one of two options. They either spent all of their income on Second Life, keeping the economic cycle within the game running or they turned all of their Lindens into real world money. Although some contest that they partake in such personal acts because it mimics their real life occupation (in most cases, exotic dancers), others state that it is strictly for the monetary aspect. Second life acts as a means of gaining extra income. These claims are contradictory in that when asked “what is the most common use for the money you receive in second life?” The same avatars most frequently responded that the money is put back in the Second Life and used for various clothing upgrades, animations and toys.

On the other hand vast amounts of income can be made through Second Life’s sexual community alone. One gentleman (for the purpose of this argument he will be called Jim) became a millionaire by revolutionizing the erotic industry nearly single handedly. Jim has been lovingly dubbed the Hugh Hefner of Second Life and advanced the sex industry through his creation of numerous stores, selling a variety of intricately carved beds and sexual toys. Although he, as every successful avatar must put money back into the economy but this serves as a testimony this ever-expanding facet of the virtual world. Ultimately, I feel that the use for the money gained from the virtual world is based on the time spent in Second Life and the amount that is originally achieved. While I am not saying that escorts are any less prevalent than the sexual business tycoons, people such as Jim are clearly business minded and devote hours per day on the improvement of his company. He makes approximately ten dollars per mass produced, and highly customizable bed not including the animations and apparel needed to perform on such an object. This is opposed to the average hourly rate of some of the most popular escorts of about 2000 Lindens (calculated escort business cards from varying locations). Although the prices are nearly the same Jim exhibits items that have a reusability factor, contrary to the escorts. To compensate for this difference many escorts equip themselves with the latest and greatest female and male anatomy and costume articles in order to entice their customers. But is there a factor that determines whether the Lindens gained in Second Life are put back into its virtual economy or spent in the actual world? According to many of the dancers and escorts that I interview the cost of the body parts, clothing and animations consumes most of their income. This however is a personal choice. I met an exotic dancer who stated that at one point Second Life paid her rent. She went through a period without it and since the economic recession she has again found Second Life as a means to an end. She earns on average 6000 to 7000 Lindens per night, approximately 750 dollars per month and a decent monthly payment on a home. Thus the decision to invest the money gained online was made out of necessity. I feel that this is a powerful drive. Those that play Second Life strictly for entertainment rarely have a need to convert their revenue to actual cash. They typically make less due to a lack of drive and therefore spend it on petty items rather than saving up for real world consumption. I feel that those that are driven to perform sexually explicit acts already are in dire straits and use second life as a way to make ends meet. There are exceptions to every rule especially in a virtual world. In 2007 the decision was made to move the adult industries to a particular section of the map with a specific tag that represents an 18 and older zone. For fear of the effect on the economy this has been under debate for years. The thought is that by taking the adult shops out of the regular, high traffic areas that it will have a dramatic effect on Second Life’s economy. In my research I have found that second life shoppers are very goal oriented. For example they know the item they want to buy, purchase it and move on. This is contrary to the window shopper of the actual world, who roams from shop to shop with a vague idea of the ideal purchase. Because of this idea I do not feel that moving the community would have such a drastic effect as predicted. This in fact might have advantages. By having all the shops of a particular genre in one specific area it would add a level of convenience not currently found in this virtual world. The idea that the services in these areas may be falling on to the screens of the younger generation is a very real possibility. But the fact that the designers of second life are defending the erotic industry says a lot in itself. It acknowledges the idea that sex sells, even in virtual worlds and that the economy would not be the same without it.

Second Life serves as its own economic world and the buying and selling of erotic services are a large part of this market. As there is a demand for anonymous virtual sex and sexual acts there will be avatars, run by real people, willing to supply this need. Many of my interviews tapped on the subject of privacy and the idea that although these intimate virtual acts are occurring, there is no real life information being exchanged and therefore one feels safe to participate without the weight of their inhibitions. Second life creates a market for the naturally sexual human population as well as the introverted shy types. This virtual world offers an environment safe from physical harm, STDs, and gives the buyer and seller a sense of control. If one feels like something inappropriate is happening or unsafe in anyway, all one would have to do is turn off the computer. The erotic services offered on Second Life appeals to all different personalities, which contribute, to its extreme popularity and thriving financial system and fast cash flow among members.

The World of Furries

Social structures and cultures both exist in the real world and in online communities. In the online community Second Life there lives a community of players known as furries, who are either play as anthropomorphic animals or as feral animals. These animals include hybrids, of various animal races, mythical creatures. The furry culture is subcategory of second life society.

In SL, short for second life, we interviewed, conversed, and spend time with various furries to get a better understanding of the culture and to be more specific their economic tendencies in the world of second life where RL, or real world, money is exchanged for digital commodities such as avatars, clothing, accessories, and role playing items. Since 99% of the goods that are available on second life are produced by the players, the money is transferred from one player to another to another (EGC 10). Furries were a population of interest due to their high occurrence in the literature on SL, and that they are part of a population which other than nation of origin does not have a representative population, but has many appearances in cultures such as the Kemono art in Japan, Indian animal spirits, and Greek mythical creatures such as sirens. My interest originated from modern anthropomorphic art in the mass media where characters such as “Tony the Tiger, Bugs Bunny, Sly Cooper, Starfox” whom are all characters seen in everyday life. To interview furs I began my research off of SL in a furry art community which is similar to deviant art, but the primary users are furs who are posting their own work without the fear of being trolled. Through this site I managed to join a forum and interview two members prior to engaging members of the SL community in SL. After the interviews I continued on to participant observation and informal interviews about the community. This course of action was taken because I was more familiar with the forum setting, and my account on the forums had built enough of a reputation through posting and time on the forums to not be seen as a griefer or a troll by the community. The furry community is primarily an internet based community that rarely congregates outside of conventioneering, and fur suiting due to the negative perception of furs through popular culture and RL mass media.

We have found that the furry community is stereotyped as perverts or furverts as they are more commonly called. I have found this to be a semi truth because most of the furs that I had interviewed were in clean zones where no adult material or adult role playing allowed. While exploring an island there was a specific warning against “yiffing” or having fur sex publicly, having their adult parts on, which are attachable phalluses out in these public areas. Generating these objects was allowed, but they were not allowed on the AVs (avatars). My informants from my multiple interviews did clarify that there is a sexual side to the furry community where one informant stated that “furry simulations are all about sex”, and another informant stated that his income from SL was partially through the selling of digital sex toys such as butt plugs/pony play tails. This informant continued to expand on his market of accessories that he had sold to reap a profit which he had used for his own expenses. The economy of second life has a major market for accessories, avatars, and clothing. As in Snowcrash’s Metaverse your avatar can look any way you want it, through customization and the utilization of various in game features which allows a user to program their own clothing, avatar, accessories and even homes. The Metaverse continues to have similarities where individuals who “can’t afford their own custom made avatars… have to buy off-the-shelf avatars” (SC37). Furries in RL only have the option of becoming their “fursona” their fur’s character by dressing in a fur suit, but in second life the player has the ability to bring out his or her fursona to life through the self customizable and user generated systems that also open a market for avatar, clothing, and object builders. Avatars also come in off the shelf versions which can either be customized through tinkering, or recombination with different parts that are on the market. When purchasing avatars, Lindins, the digital currency of SL, are transferred from one account to store owners account. The avatar that I had purchased was 500L which is roughly two dollars US. This avatar was chosen for me by another fur who wished for me to fit in better and live my SL furry social life as a golden anthropomorphic fox. Although the amount of two dollars is relatively low being in a furry avatar is like the repertoire that I had accumulated on forums by posting. A furry AV made engaging furries much less awkward due to the fear of griefers, and the possibility of being out of character in a role playing environment and being thrown off the island in a cage. The furry community that I had experienced was a very open and friendly environment in SL. All of the furs that I had met were very friendly to other furs and always welcomed a new person teleporting or appearing in the area. There was a good deal of role playing where individuals were shooting guns which took out a life meter in the game and exploded random default wood cubes all over the screen. The individuals whom we were able to come into contact with assisted me in de-noobing myself by adding a profile to my character, and had even given me the locations of places that I would be able to purchase new clothing to fit in better.

The community of furries on second life is growing due to the large population of furs already online and in the game. The ability of furs to express their fursonas in an environment where they truly are not exposing themselves in RL makes SL and the internet a gateway for self expression. The self expressive environment opens a market targeted at the furs in SL. These markets include various body part shops, accessories, animations, avatars, and clothing. Each of these different stores is capable of producing income and the proliferation the economy in Second Life. Although there seems to be a large market and many things that can be done in SL, the most common activity that I witnessed was standing around and conversing in the presence of people like themselves, which was the primary activity that the people I have interviewed engaged in when they would log into the world of Second Life

Conclusion

A big and weighty question in which to ask right about now is if SL’s microeconomy will flourish and become the next “big thing.” If so, why do we not model our real life economy after this evolving system? Sure, it has its flaws, and a lot of those flaws have to do with SL’s server rather than the economy itself. If the server was to crash, transactions could be lost; money could go up into thin air. The government is already benefiting from SL. Although Lindens specifically cannot be taxed, when the money is converted into U.S. dollars, the person who converted the money will be taxed. So, if the government is already taking notice to this online virtual economy, there must be some merit. Bills are in the process of being put through legislation that will put more controls on virtual economies such as Second Life’s. Maybe the microeconomy will not become what we use for our base system, but it is quite possible that it will become an integral part of our whole.


Citations

Reuters, A. “Surge in High-end Second Life Business Profits.” Thompson Reuters, 2006. http://secondlife.reuters.com/stories/2006/12/05/surge-in-high-end-second-life-business-profits/

Reuters, A. “Anshe Chung battles ‘PR Hype’ with some of Her Own.” Thompson Reuters, 2006.
http://secondlife.reuters.com/stories/2006/11/29/anshe-chung-battles-pr-hype-with-some-of-her-own/

Martin, J. “Consuming Code: Use-Value, Exchange-Value, and the Role of Virtual Goods in Second Life.” Journal of Virtual Worlds Research. 1(2), 2008.

Ondrejka, C. “Escaping the Gilded Cage: User Created Content and Building the Metaverse.” 2004.

Thomas M. Malaby, Coding Control: Governance and Contingency in the Production of Online Worlds. First Monday, Special Issue #7, 2006.

Freedman, R. “How to Make Real Money in Second Life.” McGraw Hill: New York, 2008.


Harris, J., & Nardi, B. (2006). Strangers and friends: collaborative play in world of warcraft.
Stephenson, N. (1992). Snow Crash. New York: Bantam.