Heavy Hands and The Angry Villager Rule

Recently there have been a lot of stories about people or organizations reacting heavy-handedly to events online, where people have organized and pushed back. It seems common enough that a look at the underlying dynamics needs to be looked at.

The hottest right now is probably the DMCA takedown requests that the Associated Press has issued against Drudge Retort. A lot has been written about this already, and a lot more needs to be written and will be written. For those who have not followed this, I would encourage you to check out the UnAssociated Press website. As you might guess from the title, they have a particular slant, going so far as to call for a blogger boycott of the AP. Culture Kitchen is another site which is providing important coverage and attempting to keep focus on the larger issues.

A second organization that seems to be constantly stumbling over its heavy-handedness is Linden Lab. Whether you look at the recent flap over whether adults who wish their avatars to appear in the shape of children would be allowed to participate in birthday celebrations for Second Life, or there repeated struggles with trademark and currency issues, Linden Lab consistently appears to act heavy-handedly, most likely at the advice of their lawyers, and then find themselves in the middle of a major brouhaha with the residents of Second Life.

Then, of course, there is the administration of Lewis Mills High School, which reacted in a heavy-handed manner when a student wrote criticisms of the administration at home one evening. This case is continuing in the Federal Courts, and one member of the administration has already received disciplinary action related to the case, and the lawyer for the administration has received a major warning from the chairman of Connecticut’s Freedom of Information Commission.

Now, let us look for a moment at ‘The Angry Villager Rule’. This was a rule from the game Dungeons and Dragons in the early days, probably over thirty years ago. Essentially, the person running the game could invoke The Angry Villager Rule, where the villagers would gather together and defeat even a very strong player in the game, in a manner similar to how army ants by their sheer force of numbers, could defeat much larger prey.

I’ve always thought of the Angry Villager Rule in terms of the Mandate of Heaven, a Chinese view that a King’s ruled by the blessing of Heaven. This blessing was seen by good weather, good crops and content citizens. Floods and famines were a sign that the mandate had been repealed. The citizens, suffering from floods and famines always seemed to me to be like the angry villagers seeking a new leader.

Perhaps a more current version of the Angry Villager rule is Clay Shirky’s book “Here Comes Everybody”. Internet based tools are enabling angry villagers to organize in response to heavy-handed actions of regimes that are losing their power because of these new enabling tools. Perhaps the folks at the Associated Press, Linden Lab, and Lewis Mills High School should be given a copy of Shirky’s new book.

So, we have a dynamic of people used to using the Internet for more and more of their social interaction, including organizing when the existing institutions don’t understand and attempt to thwart online communities. It is a compelling narrative. However, the means of mediating this dynamic seems to be slow in appearing.

The Associated Press, after a backlash against their heavy-handed DMCA takedown orders, is now talking about engaging bloggers in a discussion about what constitutes ‘fair use’ in a digital age, and even these efforts are receiving criticism from the angry global villagers. They would have been wiser to start this discussion long before issuing any takedown orders.

Even with these feeble efforts, it seems that the Associated Press is making more progress in understanding the new millennium than Linden Lab or the administration at Lewis Mills High School have been.

So, how do we establish a meaningful dialog about how the Internet is changing our social structures? How do we find a space that helps older institutions evolve at the same time as not surrendering some of the boon that the Internet has provided?