Early history of an online community

By John Suler, Ph.D.

(Page 39 of 53)

From Conception to Toddlerhood
A History of the First Year (or so) of The Palace
(a multimedia chat community)

Why write a history of Palace now? It's only a little over a year old.

This is what a few people said to me when I mentioned my plans for this chapter. Part of me thought they might be right. After all, in the grand scheme of things, how much can happen in only one year? But other Palatians were excited about the idea, and when I began reminiscing with them, it quickly became obvious that a great deal indeed had happened. In a tad over a year, Palace went from nascent stage software that Jim Bumgardner pitched to Time-Warner Interactive, to an independent corporation (TPI) responsible for a complex string of multimedia chat communities that are sprouting up all over the internet like enthusiastic mushrooms.

Everyone knows that computers and the internet never stand still. Change comes fast. The Palace is moving right along with the cyberspace revolution - and that first year may be its most critical period. It's a lot like human development. As any parent will tell you, those initial twelve months fly like lightning and the change is almost miraculous. The PalaceChild has grown by leaps and bounds. It's been challenged, stressed, even bruised a few times. In it's attempts to adapt, Palace has evolved habits in thinking and feeling that will shape its future development. Overall, like the human child, it's become a lot smarter and more socially complex. It's also developed a sense of self... a unique identity.

I. In the Womb

Before any entity is born into its world, many fundamental issues must be resolved. First of all, what is this thing? What is its potential? What will it become? Nature, in its infinite wisdom, works out these issues quite efficiently and, well, naturally. When humans create things, the process is a bit more bumpy and uncertain.

Is Palace a Game or What?

Early on, when Time-Warner gave Jim Bumgardner the option of working on either the Palace or “Catacombs of Fear” (a Doom-like game later to be called “Basement”), Bumgardner opted for the latter. Catacombs was more technically challenging and more likely to survive the budget ax, because it was more clearly the kind of recognizable “game” that Time-Warner was used to producing. Apparently, Palace was Bumgardner's true love - and his true destiny - for he soon returned to this project. But the game concept carried over. The “Game Palace,” as it was referred to in those early days, was intended to resemble a large mansion or casino in cyberspace where players could meet to play traditional card, board, and table games, chat, flirt, and engage in a legal form of gambling. Basement, as well as other add-on features, could be launched from it. Some of the games in the Palace casino would be moderated (BlackJack, Bingo, Trivial Pursuit, etc.), and some unmoderated (Chess, Checkers, Poker, etc.). Fake “digital” dollars could be allotted and tracked by the program for use in the gambling. This environment was intended for a wide adult audience, and not for teenage computer geeks who wanted a virtual hangout. Essentially, Palace was a hybrid - a cross between an on-line chat area and a multi-player game server.

Against Bumgardner's better judgment, the game concept started to overshadow the idea of Palace as a social environment. One viewpoint at Time-Warner was to create specific fictional characters and storylines to inject into the Palace experience. The characters would appear intermittently and contact with them would immerse users into a Myst-like adventure. For example, one character, “The King,” would have been a former Palace janitor who loved to impersonate Elvis. After accidentally poisoning himself by drinking cleaning fluid, he disappeared and was presumed dead - although Palace legend claims that he sporadically reappears, talking and singing, then mysteriously vanishes again. In this imaginary Palace world, users would also assume a persona or fictional identity that they could act out in the fictional plots of the Palace Game.

Bumgardner resisted this attempt to imitate Myst. Instead, he envisioned Palace as a complex networking system that would allow users the freedom to “make of it what they will” rather than impose a specific plot or game upon them. It should be a mirror reflecting the self-image of the user and not a predetermined scenario that forced users to adapt themselves to it. He also envisioned it as a “virtual bar” where singles could meet and socialize in various entertaining ways, essentially a place for dating and flirting - the kind of focus that he felt was underexploited by other software systems.

In the end, Bumgardner's vision prevailed. The Palace became, and still is, primarily a chat world - a SOCIAL world where human relationships are the main attraction. As a result, it works well as an adult environment where flirting and cyberdating is a common experience. Yet the game dimension is still there. People play chess and Geektionary. People play tricks on each other. Reminiscent of the “imaginary world” concept, users do assume fictional identities via the avatars they wear. Unfortunately, in a kind of ontogeny recapitulating phylogeny, newbie guests assume Palace *is* a fictional, Doom-like game where they can vent their pent-up frustrations by sexually and aggressively annoying other people.... at least until a wizard steps in to either correct their deviant ways or send them along the path of The King - dissipation. But this battle of good versus evil is part of the “game” too. It's just another component of that intriguing game we call “human relationships.”

Should Palace be Naughty?

The tendency towards naughty, acting-out, and sometimes outright deviant behaviors on Palace has its roots in Bumgardner's early Palace philosophy. Although he avoided the Myst-like game features, he did emphasize that Palace be “cartoony” - which creates a fantasy-driven, “this isn't really real so let's play” feeling. He also insisted that Palace promotes anonymity, or “masking.” With their true identity concealed and disguised, people would behave more loosely - an ideal condition for pranks and flirting (and, unfortunately, other more harmful behaviors). Bumgardner predicted that the eventual addition of voice communications would adversely affect the level of anonymity, and probably cause people to be more inhibited. Instead, digital signal processing could make voices sound like a cartoon voice, which would be fun as well as help maintain the anonymity level.

For several months Bumgardner pitched the idea to Time-Warner that “subversion” and “forbidden fruit” be used as a marketing tool for Palace. Users would feel like they were “getting away with something” because the Palace guaranteed anonymity (even the super-user couldn't spy on you or tell who you were). He wanted it to be a product that workers at large corporations would sneak into their office and run on the local network as inter-office goofing around with friends. He tinkered with the idea that lower employee levels could be covertly seeded with the program. He even considered the possible benefits from the publicity of someone suing for sexual harassment on the Palace. If it got to the point where companies banned its use, then Bumgardner felt he would have done his job well.

The potentially naughty and subversive qualities of Palace does indeed make it attractive to fun-loving adults. But yin always accompanies yang. The built-in genetic features that encourage uninhibited behavior also have resulted in some social difficulties. As we will see later in Palace history, a primary force behind the creation of the Wizards was the need to control excessive naughtiness and acting out.

Where will Palace Live?

In the early days at Time-Warner, Bumgardner's team was shying away from the idea of placing Palace on the internet and instead focused on it as a home/office/university chat environment for modems and LANs. They expected the office version to be the most successful, especially since the media at that time was filled with stories about entertainment software policies on office computer networks. A follow-up package for schools, with an education-oriented focus, was also considered. Although it was easy to make Palace work with the Internet, Bumgardner didn't think it would meet with success there due to stiff competition from the “free” software movement. A secondary release phase of the Palace was planned for wide area networks like CompuServe, America Online, Genie, and the World Wide Web. In this phase, Palace would be placed on one or more networks which people could access via modem from their home PC's.

As it turned out, the secondary release phase became the primary mission. The sparkling debut and final home for Palace was on the internet. In fact, an early version of Palace called “Sparky” (which is now the name attached to the smiley face) was first tested as a parasite program on IRC. The decision later to open on the web proved to be a good one. It was the perfect nurturing environment for Palace to flourish. The masses were coming to cyberspace. They wanted chat. They wanted graphics. Palace gave them both. And on the internet, the vision of Palace as a networking social environment could be more fully realized than ever possible in an office setting.

Can Palace Survive?

Palace is not an only child in the world of GMUKs. There was competition from its cousins - as there is always competition in the fast-paced arena of computer software. The Time-Warner team predicted that WorldsAway would be its main rival. It was most similar to Palace in its sophistication, but there were several important differences. WorldsAway required a CompuServe subscription and thus a fee for access time, whereas Palace was free to access and required payment only for the registered software. WorldsAway used a network of powerful servers (CompuServe) to create a single large world, whereas Palace consisted of many, small interconnected worlds, each one at a different internet address. WorldsAway had it's own play money that was used to buy new rooms and props, whereas Palace was a “free” system without restricted economics (the concept of digital gambling dollars was abandoned). Last, but not least, the WorldsAway universe didn't allow you to draw your own heads, props and rooms, or create your own independent sites. Palace did.

All in all, the Palace design gave more power and freedom to the users to “make what they will” of the Palace experience. It gave them the power and freedom to create themselves, and, if they so desired, their own worlds. With such flexibility and adaptability, Palace had an intrinsically high potential to survive by changing and evolving.

But what would it evolve into?

II. The Early Days at Main

The Palace Main site (also called “Mansion”) opened to the public in November of 1995. The first to arrive tended to be immigrants and explorers from other virtual communities, such as the AOL chat rooms, WorldsChat, and Echo. Some had grown tired of the large, impersonal, and snertish chat environments. Some simply wanted to explore new territory. When they first arrived at Palace, they often felt a bit disoriented, or experienced culture shock, since they found themselves coming from much large, usually text-only chat environments into this very small, intimate, and GRAPHICAL world. The visuals were quite overwhelming for some people. They also had a whole new set of keyboard commands to master. The beta-testers, wizards, and the Gods themselves cheerfully greeted the new arrivals and showed them the ropes.

Once they adapted, many of them felt captivated by what they had discovered. They marveled at how the props, avatars, and graphical space provided an enticing new avenue for communicating and expressing oneself (Arctic Frost's hand-made props rarely failed to impress and inspire). They were excited by the idea that they were participating in the pioneering of an entirely new type of virtual community. Most importantly, they were making new friends. People eagerly registered to become members and spent as much time as possible in their new virtual home. Some stayed up almost all night in order to hang out with their Palace chums. Here's how one old-timer described those days:

In the beginning, I was unable to see someone else use my computer; I needed to be online all the time. The same people were in the bar when I came, FO, PH, Chrissy, SJ, Storm, Sleepy and so many others. When I got in the bar, people said hi, joked with you and spoke about things, none too serious. I was in heaven!! In my day to day real life, there is stress, here there was none, just friendship, acceptance and mindlessness. The Palace was the ultimate in companionship, ready and waiting any time of the day or night. Nights when I couldn't sleep, I didn't have to listen to the sound of my own voice playing off into the night. I could come on line and find something else to think about than the work day world.

Many old-timers now sentimentally look back on those first few months as the “good old days.” The community was very small (the group “cheered” when the user list hit 40). Everyone knew everyone else. People were friendly, playful, and intimacy developed quickly. With such a small group, the server hummed away happily with very little lag clogging the chat. Jbum and other designers of Palace were around a lot, which made people feel connected to the original creative source of it all.

Some of the old-timers even pine for those good old days. With the rapid growth in the population that would come within the next few months - the “smiley boom,” as some call it - much of the intimacy, fun, and excitement evaporated for these old-timers. Although part of the excitement in those early months was the feeling of camaraderie about recruiting new members and building a new world, this pioneering effort had it's down side. Be careful what you wish for, because you just might get it. Expanding the community brought more lag, less coziness, and a waning of the feeling that this was a brand new experience. “Were we really prepared for what it has become?” one old-timer asked. “Sometimes it seemed as though we were virtual babysitters for nonexistent parents.” He was referring to another unavoidable problem that accompanied the expansion of the population - the surge of immature (often, but not always, young) people who wanted to use Palace to vent their sexual and aggressive frustrations.

One early historic incident highlighted the snert problem and was an omen of things to come. Some referred to it as “the Rape of Quentin.” A female user named Quentin was sexually harassed when another user whispered and spoke out loud obscenities to her, as well as put words into her mouth with the spoofing command. Her strong complaints about the incident, especially on the Palace Community Standards newsgroup, triggered a barrage of postings debating the social, technical and political implications of the incident. Some blamed the rising population of snerts; some blamed the Palace designers for giving too much power and anonymity to guests; some blamed users like Quentin for being thin-skinned and taking virtual experiences too personally and too literally. Should more control be exercised over foul language and behavior - like scripts that filter out obscene words? There were protests against anarchy and words defending the right to freedom of speech and expression. There were debates about “real” versus virtual rape, decency laws on the internet, sexism, and whether Palace was meant only for adults.

Palace officials intervened. In postings to the newsgroup, Mark Jeffrey and Jim Bumgardner expressed their concerns about the incident. Jim also admitted that there was a security problem with guests having too much anonymity. Previously, guests were identified only as “guests,” but now distinct ID numbers would be assigned to each new arrival so that it would be possible to keep track of their behavior (especially spoofing) so unruly guests could be identified and disciplined. Guests' ability to spoof was also curtailed, as well as their access to some rooms.

The rape of Quentin was a milestone event. It did lead to software changes that helped control the snert problem, but it's effect was more global. It brought to the surface of public discussion a wide variety of social and technical issues that are still being debated today. Although conflicts sprung up in these discussions, the overall effect of coping with this early developmental crisis was a unifying of the community. The incident motivated people to understand what the Palace experience was about. It motivated them to demonstrate their commitment to improving the community.

About the Author

John Suler, Ph.D. is Professor of Psychology at Rider University. This article comes from his online hypertext book The Psychology of Cyberspace which describes his ongoing research on how individuals and groups behave in cyberspace. His work has been reported by national and international media, including The New York Times, The Washington Post, the BBC, and CNN. www.rider.edu/~suler/psycyber/