Second Life would work well because it would be very beneficial to its users. The virtual world contains continents which could be used for educational purposes. For example, some continents can be centered on religion can allow users to communicate stances on different religions as well as learn about different religions. This environment allows users to post their unbiased opinions without having to worry about what the users think because they are being represented by Avatars. Also, it can teach users about economics because you can buy, rent, and trade property or goods and services with other users. Apart from the economic aspect, Second Life provides users with a three-dimensional way to communicate their individuality through representations in their Avatars. Avatars can take any form the users which to represent. For example, an Avatar can be made to look like your favorite movie star. When a user chooses his own symbols to represent his or her individuality, he or she is communicating themselves to the outside world. Therefore, Second Life would work well for individual freedom of expression. Individuality may be important in communicating ideas in a collaborative project; however, having too many differences could make it difficult for the group to work fluidly together.
Second Life’s chat isn’t the best environment for communication. You can only chat with other users who are online. This doesn’t allow for fluid conversations. Also, you can chat with the same users using multiple Avatars. This could be very confusing to communicate negotiations and land sales with other users. While Second Life is great at communicating individuality, it doesn’t really provide a safe environment. Paying users can come under attack from fraud. They can fall into investment schemes and failed renting agreements. Therefore, collaboration in Second Life would be hard because the virtual world doesn’t provide a trusting environment.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
I see what you mean in that it has a bunch of cool environmental features that make it unique, but it still has the standard socio-technical gap that collaboration technology always seems to have. Fluidity of chatting doesn't seem better even if the avatars are face-to-face because the user has to type the input the same way as aim or any other typical chat system. From the lecture and reading, though it does seem like there is more trust in other users because of social status of the avatars which could also make it a bit better than other technologies.
ReplyDeleteI definitely agree that Second Life offers minimal accountability due to Avatars. I think that this does encourage freedom of speech and honest commentary; however, I still think that some accountability is necessary. The Avatars should not walk around Second Life thinking it is okay to be destructive. I also agree that Second Life does a poor job at promoting and facilitating a trusting environment. Avatars can represent its user almost completely accurately, or not to the smallest degree. In addition, the fact that you chat with the same users using multiple Avatars can also be very misleading to others.
ReplyDelete