LambdaMOO is a virtual reality game or a multi-user dimension, i.e. MUD. This means that the game is a database especially designed to give users the vivid impression of moving through a physical space that in reality exists only as a descriptive data filed away on a hard drive.
Q.1 Are you a member of a MUD community? If yes, do you find yourself reflecting the events in virtual reality with real life?
“A virtual "rape", also known as "MOOrape", is defined within LambdaMOO as a sexually related act of a violent, acutely debasing, or profoundly humiliating nature against a character who has not explicitly consented to the interaction. Any act which explicitly references the non-consensual, involuntary exposure, manipulation, or touching of sexual organs of or by a character is considered an act of this nature.” [1]
On a Monday night, tens of regular Lambda users gather in the Lambda chateau’s cosy living room to chat and meet friends just like almost every other night. However, that night something strange happens. A hideous clown starts abusing two of his fellow players by using a voodoo doll, which gives him the power to use his victims sexually. That night, ‘Mr. Bungle’ raped ‘Starsinger’ and ‘legba’. To someone, who has never stepped into the world of virtual, these events might sound rather absurd. How could have someone possibly be raped in virtual reality, when no bodies were touched and no one got hurt? Julian Dibbell, or ‘Dr. Bombay’ the author of this article, and a Lambda player himself, states that every set of facts in virtual reality is shadowed by a second, complicated set: the “real life” facts. By this, he tries to explain that especially in the ‘Bungle affair’ real life and the virtual reality seem to integrate, as the rape violates the victim’s personal space and affects them beyond the game environment.
Q.2 Do you think that the rape in cyberspace is a crime against the mind? What are the implications of this to the freedom of speech?
The event sparked an outrage among the Lambda users. In fact, it provoked strong, emotional feelings, which according to Dibbell suggests that “the MUD experiences are neither exactly real or exactly make-believe, but profoundly, compellingly and emotionally meaningful.” Soon, a fierce debate filled the Lambard *social, where tens of players shared their thoughts on the issues of law, civility, ethics and crime inside their community. Indeed, for the first time, the players inside the cyberspace acted as a community, defining themselves politically as they were demanding a punishment for Mr. Bungle. Dibbell found that during the debate groups were formed taking different standpoints on the matter. Issues such as could Mr Bungle’s virtual existence be deleted or could he possibly be punished in real life for committing a sexual offence were raised and discussed extensively. However, Dibbel notes that even if the community had unified under this matter, the conversation seemed to go nowhere, as the decisive authority and the ultimate power, in this case the wizard, was missing.
Q.3 Why was the community formed so effectively during the ‘Bungle-Affair? Why could it not govern itself?
It is very interesting how the real life and the virtual reality moralities and conventions were juxtaposed in the debate that evolved around the Affair. Dibbell suggests that “when it comes to sex, perhaps the body in question is not the physical one at all, but its physic double, the body-like self expression we carry around in our heads.” This idea could also be demonstrated clearly in the *social’s discussion board; “where does the body end and the mind begin?” ‘Quastro’ asked. ‘HerkieCosmo’ replied: “in MOO, body IS the mind.”
Q.4 Do you think the fact that Dibbell was himself part of this community affects his writing and point of view? What does he mean by saying ‘…something truer and more elegant that could be found on LambdaMOO…’ ?
(This is what he says in the last paragraph. I thought it was mystic.)
cheers, Maija
[1] http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol2/issue1/lambda.html
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Perhaps ‘…something truer and more elegant that could be found on LambdaMOO…’ if we were given a more ‘universal’ representation of LambdaMOO. I am not a member of any MUD community and remain unconvinced about the ‘virtual rape’ discussed in this article. ‘Virtual rape’ is a crime of the mind but I imagine that it somehow makes the victim feel violated despite the lack of physical contact. That said my main concern is the article was written by a man about the ‘rape’ of what appear to be female characters (how many guys would have the user name ‘Starsinger’?) and there is no mention of the other crimes that take place in this community. Should I be concerned about becoming a member of these kinds of sites because I might be as equally at risk of rape as in the real world? Is ‘virtual rape’ a common occurrence?
The internet has so much potential for positive change but LambdaMOO obviously isn’t the place.
Yeah well I think that since this article (1993) the idea of online communities and they way they work has changed and evolved. For some reason though, this particular affair has come to mark the'creation' of online community.
I read an interview with the creator of LambdaMOO, and he said that he has tried to create an online portal, which would work without any governage from the technicians or creators. i think what he wanted to see was that the community would get together and create it's own rules and regulations, (which it kind of tried to do in the Bungle affair case) and work like a society. I think since then, a lot of 'society like' characters have increased in virtual communities. For example, later on a polling and voting system was applied to LambdaMOO, in order to decide on issues such as the Bungle affair.
I've never been part of a MUD community but its interesting to see the comparisons made between real life and the virtual world even in this text based sense(whereas right now we're more into the whole 3D thing with second life and so on). I guess it's kinda scary in a way how immersed you can get in cyberspace without even knowing it...more significantly, it can also affect people in different ways.
Its good to hear the community attempted to try stop it from happening again once the issue arose, but the fact that mr bungle returned again just proves how impossible it is to ban someone completely from cyberspace. I dunno - should laws in reality and cyberspace be the same or different for these types of 'crimes'? I think our expression online can be seen as an extension of our subconscious, and we can definitely be affected by what happens online - just in a different way as opposed to reality.
I think some type of restraint is definitely needed in cyberspace - whether the rules are self regulated or imposed by an authority...I mean I know how everyone keeps saying the internet is the awesome medium for freedom of speech but at the same time, laws are a really touchy subject when thing such as rape is involved. I guess thats why there is this "netiquette" ideal found online - people arent forced to act a certain way online but most people actually are respectful to each other online because there are the ideals that have transferred from society to the online community. Im sure meaningful relationships can be found on the internet - and there are positives of conversing online with people of similar interests...you just have to be careful I guess in where you communicate and what sites you visit. You also probably have to be prepared to accept the outcomes of communicating online - and that means preparing for some nasty people on cyberspace - because they can usually be found everywhere haha.
in response to the second question. I do believe that cyber rape could be considered a crime against the mind, but There should be no punishment in the'real world'. That is, crimes commited in cyberspace should be dealt with in cyberspace within the confines of the communities they are commited. Furthermore, I agree with Claire questioning why other virtual crimes aren't mentioned. One would assume that when they create an online identity they are subjecting that identity to horrible things. Some go online to act out disgusting fantasies they can't carry out in real life. By joining an online community, you are putting your precious little avetar at risk. What should be questioned is how people use these online communities to set up real life encounters to prey on others and more horrible attrocities occur than just a cyberape
I thought this article was written in a really sensationalised way - it was irritating me slightly and for the majority of the piece I was not feeling a lot of sympathy towards these people. I suppose in the end I did come around to the idea of how violating such an act could be, but I found it a little uncomfortable to parallel the virtual act with the real life. I guess there was that one gamer who had experienced sexual assaults both on and offline and she found the two comparable so who am I to judge? (I still do though - can't help it)
At the end of the day, it is a violation to a point, solely psychological though.
I agree with Tom that these matters need to be addressed within the online world - I think it blurs a lot of lines to bring real-world repurcussions into it.
Having said that, if someone's spreading hate material online, inciting violence, orchestrating acts of aggression against others, uploading evidence of physical/sexual assaults etc, obviously some aspect of societal law enforcement needs to be brought in, right?
Don't you just love how I argue with myself?
Maybe it is that the semester is starting to come to its end or maybe its just my presentation, but it seems like people were not really keen to go assess this article... (or maybe it's just that they found this article boring?)
Well, thanks for those guys who replied something :)
I guess what I was trying to get across though, was more about the idea of online community and why as a result of this incident the community seemed to co operate but in the end was not able to function in a way that MR. Bungle could have been punished. i think this reflects RL quite well, as in any community, people always seem to need authority and superiority in order to function. Why cannot people for example live in a free, anarchist society without a government? if thinking about the relationship between online and offline commnunities, I think this article reveals how similar they are in the end. (I know there is a lot of arguments against this though.) However,I think this issue is more interesting than the one of the ethics of cyber rape, as we all seem to agree that it cannot be reflected to the real life in a way that Dibbell suggests. I personally agree with the others that Dibbell is a bit biased in his opinions and in the way he talks about the cyber rape. However, I feel that again, this is very revealing of the way how people can get involved with virtual communities and develop strong views of the world accordingly.
Hello Maija, many apologies for the delay in my response my life seems to have been taken over by assignments eek!!! Guess everyone is in the same boat though!!
In terms of the notion of communities online, I thought it was quite interesting how there seemed to be an attempt at collective action in relation to the fate of Mr. Bungle. I think that, reflective of RL the group engaged in informal social control (being ‘actively unfriendly’) as a method of initial punishment prior to formal methods of control (JoFeedback erasing Mr.Bungle) occurring. Additionally I believe that such an event (virtual rape) united the community as can often be identified in RL in times of grievance or trauma. I guess this highlights how seriously people take such programs (i.e. LambdaMOO).
I’m not sure on the correct course of action in terms of punishing Mr.bungle (e.g. online or offline) as I agree with Rhianne that punishing someone offline for their activities online is transcending the boundary of reality and virtual and I’m not sure how this would work in relation to RL law. I guess that sites such as LambdaMOO can provide codes of conduct (as seen in the workshop with Second Life’s privacy documents) yet there will always be individuals who choose to violate such codes as there are individuals in RL who actively disobey the law.
Post a Comment