Underground Gambling

Myth or reality?

Linden Lab and the creators have always seen their world as an escape from the real world, a sort of, country of its own. Offering the same things your society offers you in the real world such as business, entertainment, social interaction, shopping, sex, gambling, and many more. However, with time and because of weak suppression upon Linden Lab’s side to prevent governance from the real world to oppose laws upon SL activity, this utopian thought of a separate world from our own has slowly diminished.

Gambling in casinos and other establishments, such as private clubs and places with play slots was a huge thing in SL until July 25, 2007. An online anti gambling law went into effect in the US banning gambling online. As an effect Linden Lab changed their policy when it comes to gambling stating: it is against SL’s policy to wager in games that rely on chance or random number generation to determine a winner, or to rely on the outcome of real-life organized sporting events; and provide a payout in Linden Dollars (L$) or any real-world currency or thing of value.[1] This changed the face of gambling within SL shutting down many casinos and gambling establishments. For those games still allowed to be played rules were changed or revised. Revenue in currency exchange, land sales, and advertising was lost as a result. To narrow down the amount estimated, Linden Lab and its users lost several millions of dollars.

This brings up the issue of what is considered a game of skill versus a game of chance? If games of skill still exist what makes them any different from games of chance? Generally speaking games of skill that can be waged on are defined as games in which the player/players have:

·         A learned or developed ability

·         A known strategy or tactic

·         Physical coordination or strength

·         Technical expertise within a game

·         Knowledge of the means of accomplishing a task[2]

Games one can bet on that require one or more of these traits to participate in, are games such as pool, darts, and certain card games like gin or rummy. Certain games can be classified as requiring both skill and chance. A good example would be Zyngo in SL. However, what defines them as legal is usually the amount of skill versus chance. In these instances, according to the UIGEA (Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act), the amount of skill required to play the game must outweigh the amount of chance involved. There are plenty of games that require skill in SL, puzzle games or War Zone – Chernobyl Code, are just two suggestions. In these games there are no wages or bets being placed though. This brings me to the point where I wonder how games such as Zyngo, Peek-a-Nudge (one armed bandit machines), and other similar games are still allowed to exist? And if they exist what is stopping poker games to still exist? So I set out to investigate if there were still any places poker was currently being played like in an underground gambling ring or similar.

After checking various websites, forums, and through investigative reporting in world I was quite unsuccessful in actually gaining an experience when it comes to underground gambling. No one was willing to lead me anywhere that specifically engaged me in the underground gambling world, even after offering them a small amount of L$ in compensation for information. The few individuals I spoke with about underground gambling definitely said it existed, one even gave the name of a destination to go to, but once I was there I realized it was a dead-end. All individuals I spoke with wished to remain anonymous as well. So the question is not if these underground gambling operations actually exist. The question is how to get into them?

Being a fairly new user of SL probably hurt my chances slightly, considering I had not yet made a very good network with individuals that could potentially further help me with my investigation. Perhaps the fact that I was an investigative reporter on the record while speaking with individuals made them conceal information from me, very speculative but maybe. So for the mean time I will have to settle with the information I got while further investigating the world of underground gambling and SL. While I pleasure my gambling needs with existing so called legitimate “games of skill” Zyngo, Skill Deal, and Hokus Pokus and gain experience in world, perhaps in time I will be led to where the real action is happening, the underground gambling.

---

[1] Linden Lab® Official:Policy Regarding Wagering in Second Life, http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Linden_Lab_Official:Policy_Regarding_Wagering_in_Second_Life

[2] Games Of Chance vs. Games Of Skill,

http://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/games-of-chance-vs-games-of-skill.html

Extra Blog: WIO (World Internet Organization)

There has been a lot of talk about governance in Virtual Worlds during the term. Whether or not there should be a governing body that dictates what goes on, on the internet, or not? With real-world commodification becoming more evident in virtual worlds the means for governance is obviously starting to enter real-life court. Issues such as these are typically stated in the TOS or EULA’s of games on where (which state or country) to handle them. A lot of games are based out of California and many users are directed to handle virtual world disputes in that state, but if a game is based out of Sweden should I have to travel all the way across the world to handle a dispute? And If I don’t want to deal with travelling, should I really just give up my rights and let it go? This is a huge injustice that gives more power to the developers and creators of these games. The following is my theory for a solution.

It is not foreign to us that issues have existed between governance that crosses geographical borders. War crimes, economical crimes, personal crimes etc. have all previously been committed overriding country borders. That is why organizations like the EU, UN, or NATO have come into existence. Not only have such crimes existed, but also, media crimes such as pirating films or p2p sharing of music. The organization Interpol exists for certain issues that pertain to these types of crimes. My point is clear here, issues of legality have previously been handled when it comes to crimes that go beyond geographical boundaries. Also issues that arise when there is no one particular means for governing these. A coalition or an organization is formed in order to handle such problems. Thus, an organization should be formed to govern the internet.

An organization like this would definitely have some issues considering everything we have examined throughout this course; particularly arguments in readings by authors Lastowka, Castronova, and Post/Johnson. The issue of virtual justice, governance, and jurisdiction are major issues. The answer is to form an organization that allows the freedom of the internet to remain fair, whilst handling issues that for example are too hard for either party involved addressing through courts in their particular area. This organization will also dictate what is legal or not. For example all things that currently exist: child pornography, fraud, theft etc. will obviously remain illegal while certain issues such as intellectual property will be handled by the organization. When governance of virtual worlds comes into mind this organization can see over the TOS’s and EULA’s to perfect any issues that can become iffy. The key here is to create a sort of mediator of all the things that can arise as an issue online or in virtual worlds, this way confusion would be eliminated. One may argue also, it is not even clear what should or should not be governed in real life. That is exactly what an organization such as this one will do.

An organization such as this would cause much controversy to arise about the freedom of the internet. With an imperfect world though there will always be imperfect answers or solutions. All we can do is to try and limit the amount of problems that currently exist or that will arise in the future. The internet is so broad no one person can know all of its capabilities, which is both a good and bad thing. All one can hope for is to allow us humans our freedom and to protect us against those trying to limit that freedom; which would be the main goal of an organization like this.

Re-Write: Socialization in MMOG's

T.L. Taylor’s chapter out of the book Play Between Worlds: Exploring Online Game Culture we were assigned to read this week is about socialization within MMOG’s. Taylor educates us on various different levels of socialization in different games. MMOG’s such as Everquest or LOTRO uses socialization in forming for example guilds to help each other successfully and quickly progress in game play. Taylor means that these social interactions and relationships are very important in MMOG’s. In the game Second Life the social aspects of the game are what drive it and make it what it is. An even better example of a game which requires the use of socialization in order to run is probably LambdaMOO. A completely text based MMOG where the social aspect of the game, is the game. Without the social aspect and the ability to interact with other avatars/users in games like Second Life, LambdaMOO, Everquest, and LOTRO it is safe to say the games would not reach their current popularity. Also the games would become much more difficult considering you would have to play all on your own.  

Taylor goes on to add though, that the social aspects of these games are not just important for in game purposes but also for the players outside the game. “One of the most notable things about games like EQ are the ways they are deeply social. While much of what we hear about gaming in the popular press evokes images of alienation and isolation, it is often grave misunderstanding of (or sometimes a willful bias against) the nature of these games” (30). What Taylor is saying is the relationships players gain in these various MMOG’s are very important to many of them and continue to be important to them in real life not just in-game. Where society has judged “gamers” of being outcasts and “socially inadequate” in real world social settings, these games end up being very important to the users in developing and maintaining a normal social life.

When it comes to my level of experience in game social interactions, specifically in LOTRO, they are slim. Considering the low level I am at though it would make more sense to comment further as I move along and gain higher levels. On the other hand the game Habbo Hotel, in which I have spent a lot of time and gained a lot of experience in, the social aspect, is what drives this game. This is a real life MMOG and just like in real life the use of social interactions is huge. You can order stuff at a restaurant, buy stuff from other users, have a party in your room, or just sit at a café and socialize. These are all things that in real life require social interactions, just like in-game. Just as Taylor describes, socialization in games are very important to the users, I one hundred percent agree from personal experiences. Without the social aspect of these games and relationships that are formed from the games, they would not exist. There are plenty of other games out there that many people enjoy that are not MMOG’s, but are not nearly as popular as some above mentioned MMOG’s. This clearly states the point that socialization in MMOG’s is very important for their existence and for their users.

Re-Write: Virtual World Collective Action

When protesting in the real world everyone assembles physically, discusses a plan, and then carries out their protest. This protest is usually in the form of gathering a massive crowd equipped with slogans, signs, and chants to protest their means. In Bridget Blodgett’s article, she discusses virtual protesting. Blodgett explains that through Hacktivism and CMC (Computer Mediated Communication) virtual protests are able to form.

Hacktivism is the way in which protesters use the internet to carry out their protests. These different types of protests can vary as Blodgett explains, “Hacktivism encompasses many different types of activities within its boundaries, from the emailing of politicians to denial of service attacks” (3.3.1).

CMC is the way in which these social movements form by use of the internet and/or other technologies. Social movements use for example the internet to gather people together, this is CMC. Or through other technologies or mobile devices such as telephone CMC, portable gaming device CMC, or IPads etcetera.

Blodgett uses her theoretical framework “Virtual World Collective Action” to set up some guidelines for the way social movements and protests work in virtual worlds. There are four key foundations to Blodgett’s model, they are:

1.      “Degree of virtualization: degree of virtualization is a simple percentage of the amount of organization and participation that was achieved offline or virtually.

2.      Legality: legality is a measurement of how legal the actions of the protests were both in planning a protest and holding it.

3.      Cultural homogeneity: this is a measure of how similar individuals within the protest are to each other in regards to their cultural views and identity.

4.      Limitations on Participation: Limitations on participation is a measure of if and how individuals are prevented from participating in the protest” (3.4).

A good example of a virtual protest is one that happened in the game Habbo Hotel back in 2006. This protest was called the "Pool’s Closed" protest. A group of users protested the occurrence of racism in-game, claiming the game moderators were in particular blocking black avatars. This sparked a group of users to protest by blocking the entrance to a pool in game preventing the other users from entering. Habbo Hotel at the time did not allow their users the ability for their avatars to walk through the body of another in-game avatar. Thus, other users were blocked from entering the pool. One thing unique about the protesters is that they were all black avatars with giant afro’s, dressed in suites.

The fact that this protest happened mostly online made the degree of virtualization slim. Members were mobilized online and the protest itself was carried out online. One thing interesting about the protest is that the use of CMC was very helpful in this one. Members were not only summoned through Habbo Hotel but also through various forum websites and other Habbo related sites. This was a very effective way of using CMC. In terms of legality within this protest the only thing that can possibly be deemed illegal would be the violations of the EULA or TOS. Since there is no governing body of the internet, as Blodgett explains, actual real-world governance is almost out of the question. In terms of Habbo Hotel governance the protests were judged against violating the TOS and several bans were administered. The cultural homogeneity in this protest was rather good. Habbo Hotel has its origins out of Finland; therefore the use for cultural homogeneity was broad, bringing together various cultures and people of different citizenships to protest. Also spreading the word of using one similar looking avatar amongst them all showed that CMC was a good help in mobilizing the cultural homogeneity in this protest. When it comes to limitations on participation, the only fact that would limit someone from participating would be they either do not have a computer or way to use the internet, or they didn’t have access to the game. Which in either case the need to participate is pointless considering one would most probably not know of the protest. Blodgett’s model is a good framework for virtual protests and can be effectively used to examine many other virtual protests much like the examples in her article And the Ringleaders Were Banned: An Examination of Protest in Virtual Worlds.

War in Ultima Online

Gold farming rivalry arises after unknown leak of game breaking code

Breaking news - A war between two gold farmer coalitions in the game Ultima Online recently broke out. Gold farmer groups EasyUO and Blacksnow, led by Rich Thurman and Lee Caldwell, recently were reported to in game GM’s. Certain operations for both coalitions were banned as an affect. The information leading to the bans origin is currently unknown, leading suspicion to arise, not only between the two groups, but also within their own entities.

            Thurman a Texas resident, whose operation completely yielded, was accused by leader Lee of having leaked information crucial to the bans. Somebody had contacted the GM’s of the game UO and accounts for Lee’s coalition were banned, as well as all the accounts for Thurman. Thurman, whom for months has been making a profit out of his home by the use of in game bots and macroing to farm for in game gold, has been making quite a profit. By selling in game gold Thurman has approximately been making $4000 weekly. That projects his yearly income to $208,000 dollars yearly which is a very large income within gold farming. Thurman used several computers with separate accounts as well as having one main account. He also had multiple people working in his coalition EasyUO, the amount of members still undisclosed.

            Lee’s information is a bit more concealed. He works out of California and he is definitely one of the top gold farmer’s in the world. Lee is the one who instigated this war, after assumptions that Thurman given him misleading information. Lee and Blacksnow are the sole contributors to hostile actions towards EasyUO thus far in the war and without any retaliation.

            The whole conflict started with the fact that an in game code was shared from an independent Swiss gold farmer known as Cheffe. He possesses an in game code that enabled easier access to farming gold. This code, exevents, was shared with Thurman and his coalition. Cheffe and EasyUO were the only ones to possess this code which obviously lured Lee’s interest into attaining it. After futile attempts to create cooperation with Thurman and attain exevents, Lee rested on coexisting in the market peacefully. So when the two coalitions were recently reported to the GM’s of UO suspicion arose immediately. Lee’s accusations arose from the supposed indication that one of EasyUO’s, member’s accounts was still active and running. This account was also using exevents contrary to what Thurman had promised Lee about Cheffe suspending use of the code. Lee drew the conclusion that the information regarding exevents and EasyUO was false thus declaring war on EasyUO and Thurman.

            The issue is far from being resolved as Lee and Blacksnow continue to sabotage any attempt from Thurman to restart his coalition. As investigation continues to find the culprits of these events, whether it be Cheffe whom shared the information without Blacksnow or EasyUO’s knowledge, or whether a mole exists within either coalitions, the future resolution of this conflict remains remote.