That's how Second Life works. Landowners can eject or ban people from their land. This is entirely at the discretion of the landowner. People are always complaining about having been banned from clubs, but there are hundreds of clubs, run by hundreds of people.
This is far, far better than having "moderators". In practice, social media moderators come from the same pool of people that staff low-end call centers. Arming them with ban hammers while giving them anonymity and lack of accountability creates major headaches of its own.
Second Life does have a few paid moderators. A user has to file an abuse report to make anything happen, and in a few days, someone will process the trouble ticket. Policy is not to attempt to intervene in resident to resident disputes at all.
What makes this work is that it's a big, sparsely populated world. A user's radius of annoyance is about 100 meters, and the whole world is about the size of Los Angeles.
So, jerks are local, even with over 50,000 people logged in.
The metaverse crowd, if and when they actually create big virtual worlds with large numbers of users, needs to understand this.
This is far, far better than having "moderators". In practice, social media moderators come from the same pool of people that staff low-end call centers. Arming them with ban hammers while giving them anonymity and lack of accountability creates major headaches of its own.
Second Life does have a few paid moderators. A user has to file an abuse report to make anything happen, and in a few days, someone will process the trouble ticket. Policy is not to attempt to intervene in resident to resident disputes at all.
What makes this work is that it's a big, sparsely populated world. A user's radius of annoyance is about 100 meters, and the whole world is about the size of Los Angeles. So, jerks are local, even with over 50,000 people logged in.
The metaverse crowd, if and when they actually create big virtual worlds with large numbers of users, needs to understand this.