ntly people on-line have the qualities Kateb mentioned in order to make their on-line life free, but they will always be somewhat strangled by the constant overhanging risk of offending another user. The plot of the movie Pleasantville clearly shows a type of Utopia, in which changes are being make and boarders stretched, subsequently destroying its self in search for true freedom. The inhabitants of Pleasantville learn, one by one, that by keeping everything in their perceived euphoric state they were, in actuality, stifling their sense of themselves. It is impossible in on-line communities, and real life communities, to reach a Utopian state; there will always be a social order, objections to that order, and consequences.
On-line there is a definite hierarchy in social standing, as in the movie Pleasantville. The people at the top of the ladder make the decisions on how the community should be run. Having a hierarchy alone contradicts the idea of Utopia, because it limits the freedom of its inhabitants. MUDs are a prime example of hierarchy on-line. There are the creators, which have complete control of what goes on in their domain. They make the rules and enforce them. Those who wish to abide by the rules may stay, and those who don't will be kicked out2. This is an interesting definition of Utopia, where all those with similar ideals are grouped together, but it is also oppressive to those with differing ideals. They are restricted from mingling with people because of a difference of beliefs. The meaning of Utopia needs to be more clearly defined for whom it pertains to, the majority, or the entire populous. In MUD's it is generally practiced along the lines of a democracy, but democracy doesn't necessarily equal freedom, or Utopia. If the populace decides one thing, it doesn't necessarily mean that, that thing is correct, good, or just. The populace might also be feeling pressure from those at a higher standing, which would affect their opinion....
Please join StudyMode to read the full document