1. I think it doesn't change anything, with voice you can act out as if you was really there, or get more from reality, not much different from text chat, and actually, I think it has the capability to pleas both groups even better than text most of the times

Posted at 7:37AM on Aug 15th 2007 by TigroSpottystripes Katsu

2. "Has anyone here flat-out refused to use voice? Why?"

You HAD to ask dintcha?

I will not use voice. Ever. I "flat-out refuse".
Why?

One of my partners in SL is deaf RL. Obviously voice is not an option for her. I've been communicating just fine with her and everyone else too without voice, and will continue on as usual.

I'm also not using voice as a protest because I believe its a waste of time, resources and focus for LL, when they could be fixing a ton of things before trying to slap some new shiny onto a grid thats barely functioning as it is.

I'm also not going to be using voice as a protest and to make a stand in solidarity for my deaf and hard of hearing friends, groups and residents, as well as others who for whatever reasons are not able to participate in that medium either.

My own predictions that the addition of voice would prove divisive to the community of SL, and also add more strain onto the already creaking grid have come to fruition.

In short:

http://brace-coral.livejournal.com/?skip=10#brace_coral100191

Posted at 9:08AM on Aug 15th 2007 by Brace

3. Anyone protesting voice as a waste of LL's resources don't understand what the process actually was to implement voice in the first place. Another company did it with little involvement of any actual Lindens. The same goes for WindLight. Those resources weren't going to stop lag!

But seriously, I use voice plenty, but also still type plenty. There are several people I know that can hear voice but don't have their mics set up so they can still take part. I type or talk based on what the majority of people around me are doing. It also depends on what I'm talking about and what time of the day it is where I'm at.

I'm glad to see someone actually admit that there isn't that much of a discrimination/exclusion issue between voice and typing.

Posted at 11:49AM on Aug 15th 2007 by SqueezeOne Pow

4. There are dozens of good reasons for not wanting to use or hear voice, that have been set out all over the community. Personally, I've yet to *encounter* voice - it seems I only travel in Immersionist circles!

I think the article you cite has it all backwards too - Immersionists *are* transhumanists, and militant augmentationists (militant ones, not people who are just using SL as a tool for their First Lives) are often cultural reactionaries, lashing out against our transformation beyond the limitations of the atomic world.

I think what voice is showing is that we've already segregated ourselves....

Posted at 2:32PM on Aug 15th 2007 by Sophrosyne Stenvaag

5. The sky is not falling on our heads. :)

So far, if we see that someone has voice disabled, we revert to text chat.

In my club (Timeless Underground) the chat areas are now parcelled off so as not to spoil it for the people dancing.

New challenges bring new solutions. :)

Some people cannot type, but they can talk. Remember that too. It's not all about you.

- Timeless

Posted at 2:41PM on Aug 15th 2007 by Timeless Prototype

6. What I found interesting is the description of the augmentationists, which gives the impression of younger, hipper, more open, or...to my mind, less able to understand the reasons why immersionists fight for anonimity..ie...the desire to keep the rl police and others of their facist ilk away from the front door at least one more day, just because the society in which you are located has made a slight shift as to what is considered right or wrong this week. I suspect that a good number of immersionists are older, and have seen the wind change more than once, and may well know someone or several someones who have lost or been denied employment because of something they did proudly and openly as a younger idealist, and who may have at the time even been lauded for doing. I will be interested in hearing from the "my life is an open book" crowd in about 20 years, after their open book has come back to haunt them a few times.

Posted at 2:41PM on Aug 15th 2007 by shin

7. Using voice does not mean you are bad person, nor does it mean you are narrow-minded. It is intolerance and prejudice that separates people.

And so, again, we shall see history repeat.

Posted at 2:58PM on Aug 15th 2007 by Timeless Prototype

8. Based on that blog I'd have to say I'm an augmentationist with issues about transhumanity and many immersionist qualities.

The problem with those definitions is that they're too limiting. I have a bunch of friends that are technically augmentationists because they are quite open about their RLs and aren't playing a role (from what I can tell) but they aren't too keen on voice so far and most of their interactions are pretty immersionist...talking about builds, different themed sims, etc.

If anything they would fit in a 3rd category that I think I'd probably fit as well: game-ists. They're the people that treat SL as a form of entertainment (it is a game right now) and don't take it as seriously as either of the other groups. We have real life jobs and social lives. We don't get SL-married or have pretend sex. SL

Posted at 6:45PM on Aug 15th 2007 by SqueezeOne Pow

9. uh...I guess I got cut off. Basically we don't take SL very seriously but are still respectful of others in SL so we can't be considered griefers.

We're definitely not in SL for complete immersion or augmentation!

Posted at 6:47PM on Aug 15th 2007 by SqueezeOne Pow

10. I also found it strange how the author seemed to reverse my own sensibilities on who is the "old-fashioned" group. I view the "immersionists" as the more imaginative types intent on transcending or bypassing the limitations of the human condition while the "augmentists" are the close-minded ones who can't conceive of a virtual world as anything but a new communications medium. And this from a professed transhumanist? Sorry, I agree with Gwyn that voice as it is currently implemented does not really represent an advancement of communications but rather a step back to include the use of this newfangled device known as the telephone.

The other fallacy in his argument is identifying the early adopters of SL as the hidebound luddites in this situation! On the contrary, many of the first group remain on the forefront in taking SL in new directions, and many have been using voice through outside products for years. I assume this is just ego protection since he found himself in the second, late-adopter group but wouldn't want to think of himself as behind the curve.

As for me: I have refused to install voice so far. This is not out of any ideological stance but just because I'm a terrible multitasker, and my old system just doesn't have the capacity to handle yet another layer of complexity. I already have trouble keeping track of all my SL friends as they get together in text chat, SL IM, email, GoogleTalk, Skype, WoW messaging, Yahoo, webradio streaming etc. I just don't feel like adding another proprietary audio channel to the mix.

Posted at 7:11PM on Aug 15th 2007 by Ananda

11. Hi, I am the author of the article. Some opinions relevant to this discussion are on my blog:

http://transumanar.com/index.php/site/comments/life_20_augmentationists_in_second_life_and_beyond/

In summary:

As a transhumanist, I support those who want to change the cards we have been given by nature.

But the point I am trying to make is another. Even if I were not a transhumanist, I would not complain against the second lifestyle of other SL users, simply because it is not my business as long as it does not affect me. So I cannot accept when immersionists who do not want (for their own reasons, all perfectly valid) to use voice in SL say or imply that nobody should be allowed to use voice. This is, I think, a luddite attitude. SL is big enough for many second lifestyles, and my second lifestyle is not others’ business as long as it does not affect them.

So the analogy I am trying to establish is:

Refusing to allow _others_ to use voice in SL = Refusing to allow _others_ to enhance themselves in RL

Both attitudes are against the live and let live principle. I understand the concerns of immersionists in SL and those of bioconservatives in RL, but relinquishment (not implementing options that could be implemented) is NOT the way to go.

Posted at 2:10AM on Aug 16th 2007 by Giulio Prisco

12. Personally, I don't see it so much as people against voice. As the posting above your's mentions, there are any number of ways that voice has been available to anyone who has wanted it for months. What the backlash seems more like to me is having it forced upon us as a required feature. For the last several months now everything has seemed to focus on getting "voice" as part of the baseline viewer, rather than improving or stabalizing the platform itself. I know I will get the standard "voice is run on 3rd party servers and does not effect the sl grid", but I have trouble believing that all that spatial information that has to go back and forth to determine volume and position is not impacting the sl servers and bandwith usage. The voice itself may be rendered and delivered from different servers, but I'm also pretty sure where all that positioning information is coming from. Since there were already so many 3rd party options available, I see it more as a dog and pony show, meant to distract attention away from the real stagnation of the platform with something that looks flashy in a press release, but adds nothing not already easily available, and have implimented it in such a way as to make those who do not wish to use it readily identifiable, rather than as a real opt-in feature, as it would have been if left to the aforementioned options for voice.

Posted at 9:23AM on Aug 16th 2007 by shin

13. I agree with the transhumanist. Also, why do so many anti-voicers keep telling the rest of us how we should enjoy SL?

People keep pretending voice is a "requirement" and yet I see a lot of avs without white dots over their heads and plenty of avs WITH dots over their heads typing. So much for the "requirement" theory.

The time for predictions of doom for SL's community from voice is over. It's here. Time to look at what's ACTUALLY happening instead of making assumptions and predictions.

Besides, all the assumptions and predictions are doing is paving the way for prejudice. You run the risk of causing the very thing you wish to prevent!

Posted at 4:41PM on Aug 16th 2007 by SqueezeOne Pow

14. Personally I have no problem with voice chat. I choose not to use it but that's mostly because I don't have a mic.
Though I probably wouldn't use it anyway because Iget tongue tied easily.

Posted at 1:26AM on Nov 11th 2007 by Parttimetara Dreamscape