All Hail M Linden who blogged about his first week, brown bag lunches, and sitting beside a rabbit at the staff town hall.
As M said, “As I start my second week, I can happily say I have a sense of what makes Linden Lab and indeed Second Life such a magical place. It’s people with passion for the virtual world. And, it all starts with the Resident community. Thank you for a wondrous first week!”
And how wonderful to see that one the same day as his in-world staff meeting that the coders in the Lab were upholding their high standards for community relations in a discussion about future features and what the minimum chip set will be to take advantage of coming improvements to the look of Second Life. The discussion is about rendering shadows – which, like Windlight and maybe Dazzle will add oh so much to the stability and functionality of the Grid.
Let’s listen in shall we? (And thanks Eris for the tip):
First, our community relations responds to concerns that the addition of rendered shadows to Second Life will be built to a specification for a higher chip than many users might have, and in so doing acknowledges feedback from the community and draws an allusion to being childlike (which I assume means full of creativity and joy):
A number of people have been e-mailing me directly complaining that this doesn’t work with their GeForce 7 GPU. GeForce 7 was introduced in June 2005, which means it would be starting preschool in the fall. It’s old enough to talk in complete sentences, it’s beyond obsolete. Frankly, drawing the line at GeForce 8 (not even current gen any more) for a still-in-development high end feature is generous. That would be like Crytek saying they’re not going to add any features to Crysis that are DirectX 10.0 only (probably a bad example what with the whole Vista thing, but you see my point).
Next, our community relations manager continues to explain that he has the best interests of the community at heart (emphasis added).
I’m not going to apologize for it, and I’m not going to pander to people who think a 3 year old architecture should receive as much support and attention as current offerings.
Next, our community relations manager provides a helpful technical explanation in layman’s terms:
The way I see it, if you don’t care enough about graphics to keep and maintain an up to date system, you shouldn’t expect to experience significant graphics improvements. If I invest resources to supporting an old chip that’s being phased out, I get a much lower return on that investment than if I would have put those resources into a chip that’s becoming mainstream. The number of installed GeForce 7′s in the world is decreasing while the number of GeForce 8′s is increasing, and I don’t expect GeForce 7′s to make a comeback.
Finally, he makes a helpful suggestion that further feedback is welcome:
Now, before the over reaction machine spins up and I get an e-mail about an open letter from the cheapskates of the world…
While acknowledging the diversity of those who use Second Life, their financial abilities, and their relationships with their bosses:
…this doesn’t mean Second Life is going to be GeForce 8 only, just that you’ll need that kind of card if you want the absolute best experience. Second Life will still run on that POS laptop your boss let you take out of the recycling bin at work.
Welcome aboard M! You’ll hardly need to expend much effort at all in building a constructive dialog with your stakeholders!
Photo by melaniekiddofsl on Flickr
…and this years Pulitzer Prize for Creative Wit & Sarcasm in a Blog goes to…
I’m going to have to call “bullshit” here, Dusan. That conversation took place on the SLDev list, and while I agree that the message that you extracted certainly has some *cough* shortcomings and is fraught with *face palm* one liners ripe for out of context stand up routines, it most certainly was not in the realm of community relations, it was on a *developers* mailing list.
I’ve spent a good deal of my life on developer mailing lists. The communication can be frank, reactive, often under stress and rarely is it about giving the end users roses and champagne, but more often about the next cool shiznet and how to get there. That’s a necessity if you are going to move a platform ahead.
That said, it must be matched with a healthier ballast of things like oh, stability of which we’d likely agree we are lacking.
Yeah – I see your point Grace, and I know the dev lists are rough and tumble…but this isn’t exclusive to that list lately – there’s been some mentor chat, some in-world responses to issues and a few other things that strike me as being indicative of a kind of hubris that I haven’t seen quite as pronounced in a while. Maybe they’re all stressed with a new boss, and maybe I’m choosing something because it’s the best way to illustrate a point.
Sure, it’s not meant to be “community relations” when you’re tossing stuff around ona dev list, but this shows how the decision process is made cowboy style. And while dev lists are for the code jockeys, sure, we’re in the adult world now – the combination of the Libertarian Tao of Linden is also taken to an arrogant extreme when put in the wrong hands.
I totally disagree that this is how you move the platform ahead. You move the platform ahead because you have a coherent vision to which the code is subservient.
You have Tao at the top and hubris at the front lines, and all that stands between is an ineffective JIRA. Although maybe M will give us all a hand and drag us out of decisions being made micro-style with no macro framework, by a bunch of folks who need to thump their chests a lot to push their own versions of the SL vision.
And rendered shadows would be wonderful. But shouldn’t they reassign this task to the back burner and put all hands on fixing the stability issues? Oops – sorry, under Tao you do what you wish to do, it’s how we advance the platform.
[...] even the most basic mechanics of outreach. Hubris and Complicity In all deference to Grace who took me to task for saying that the sarcasm and arrogance of a Linden on the SLDev list was all about the context [...]
“You move the platform ahead because you have a coherent vision to which the code is subservient.”
AMEN!!
I hate to agree with Lindens on anything..but I think Grace called this right. I may agree with you that they should be working on stability issues rather than shadows..but..if they have a guy working on shadows..he should be doing it for current or future cards…not 3 gen old cards. I’m on a 7 series myself, so would not get the benefit…but I’ve gone up 3 generations of card since I’ve been inworld over the last 2 years to try (not always sucessfully) to get better performance…and will quite possibly be on an 8 series by the time this is implemented anyway…and even if I’m not…so what? I won’t see shadows. I’ve spent my whole gaming life chasing the latest game graphically…never getting closer than “just about enough card” for maybe 2 or 3 months. I’ve been chasing SL since I logged on. Doesn’t stop me from coming in..just makes me drool at the ad’s for the next gen card..^_^.
Now..you want to talk hubris…I think your column on the child avi SL5B builds points that out much better…^_^. They could have just accepted the builds (in PG regions), and made the content decisions based up the normal PG rules. That way they would not have felt they had to exclude any SL group. As for the dev above..he should be programming for the 10,000 series…^_^
“…but this isn’t exclusive to that list lately ”
You post excerpts are exclusively from that list, although your points may have been otherwise, I didn’t see any examples of such. Mentors are volunteers not Lindens; they represent or speak for Linden Lab. As for other things, you’d have to be more clear on that point for me to understand.
“You move the platform ahead because you have a coherent vision to which the code is subservient.”
In practical terms, if you don’t allow your technical team to have forward thinking space and freedom, call it “vision”, then they get complacent and stale.
So yes, please have some product management vision and a means by which to execute against that, but don’t expect to be ahead of the game if all you have to execute are code monkeys clattering away in the background waiting for the next work order.
It’s about balance; all product vision with no technical forward thinking lends itself to being dangerously ignorant and behind in the marketplace.
We should probably ask – “What percentage of development hours are going against innovation versus sustainment?” That might be a more meaningful conversation rather than exchanging mantras.
I think that it _is_ community relations, just within the dev and technical community – and while that community is quite robust and used to a bit of joshing and rough-and-tumble in this way, that particular statement made many people very cross.
I would rather people didn’t feel restricted when saying things in this sort of arena, honest communication saving a lot of time in development, but one always has to mind oneself a _bit_, just out of politeness. (And If it _wasn’t_ the result of frustration, or a sudden sarcastic whim, and does actually reflect opinion, then that is quite a serious issue.)
Then I’m glad we got the dialog going Grace and Shin, although sure, I’ll concede that I had the bad manners to take something which really wasn’t ever intended for the context in which I slammed it.
So, certainly – innovate from within, push the limits, and push the minimum spec needed to ‘enjoy the grid’ while you’re at it – Blue Mars is doing it, SL should prep for it, and I’ve been dreaming of rendered shadows and ambient occlusion from day one. I retract this as an example of community relations.
It really makes me stop and wonder, however, whether I should stop contributing “mantras” to this wider debate – far wiser minds than mine have obviously thought long and hard about it. I certainly appreciate the insight into management theory as well, Grace, and I think you’ve got something there about giving space to the team to push the limits.
Linden has done quite well with its approach, philosophy, attitude, coding gurus, and continues to be sustained by the thoughtful insight of the long time residents. So apologies because I really feel like I hit some sort of sore spot – and again, retract this as any sort of indication of Linden’s overall attitude, culture, or as a small signature of hubris – as you so rightly point out, this is what’s needed – innovation, pushing limits, pushing back and pushing the envelope.
I’ll try in the future to contribute more than a few mantras, really this blog is just random observations and feelings, but I should try to show respect for the coders and management style that’s brought us so far.
I appreciate your patience Grace and Shin, sometimes we need to stumble around a little looking for the root of our frustrations and often find them misplaced.
Side note: Nicholaz comments about this as well, with a link to the perspectives of others on the SL forums. A combination of anxiety over minimum specs, misunderstanding of where the project was in the development path, and folks who just didn’t understand that the Linden I pointed to in the first place was stressed out.
The guy is of course right to do an experimental feature for hardware that is easiest to support it. But what crossed people is that he makes gives the impression that hardware which most people consider up to date (not razor cutting edge though) is hopelessly backwards (my own machine would fall into this category and calling a graphics card, which had cost me $150 just a year ago “obsolete” isn’t going to make him friends).
The other thing is, as I’ve pointed out in my blog, is that from past experience, people extrapolate what happens from the point when somewhere in LL someone comes up with a new “this is something we’re working on” thing.
With a different company (one with a different track record of how to implement innovations) and a different attitude (even his very first announcement and call for feedback came with some preemptive “get to grips” comments) an announcement like this would have had the guy covered in rose petals.
With LL however, there is a reason that people are quick to draw torches and pitchforks … even if it’s just bad communication and a bad-day, the communication quirks have quite a history with the Lab.
[...] the Lindens in their infinite wisdom are not going to apologize for it, and they’re not going to pander to people who think a 3 [...]
Really, the relevant issue is the tone. I don’t think anyone would argue with the technical aspect of what was said. By the time rendered shadows are ready for prime-time, even *I’ll* be on something newer than the 5500 FX I’m on now, and, let’s face it: do you really want your older card to be doing MORE work and being SLOWER? Second Life is slow enough as-is, usually. It’s the tone with which it was said.
I agree Ky….and while Grace does a persuasive job talking about coding culture, I actually think if the overall culture of the Lab was a little more sensitive to the community I would have seen this as a sad, stressy moment for some poor coder rather than a marker of a deeper corporate tone.
My original post was never about the chip set discussion. It was about tone, community relations, and pointed out the sarcasm, mocking, and arrogance. Sure, these are all common in coder culture, but as other more “code-y” people have pointed out, it goes hand in hand with a wider disenchantment with their approach to community building, whether on SLDev or elsewhere.
While Grace is right – coders can be cowboys, and it’s admirable of her to point that out, the more I’ve thought about it and read the commentary (especially over on the forums) the more I think that her initial call of “bullshit” should be reconsidered.