Bang on, and well put.
Thanks for the comment.
collin

I do enjoy your insights however.

Thanks for the followup.

Well, quite honestly, I’ll end commentary on the “merits of the example” by saying there are none; It was just another despicable marketing vehicle to skirt “Advertising and Children” guidelines… Another marketing campaign that submerges kids into THE brand, disguising the true intention which is to bluntly telling the kids to tell their parents to spend their vacation bucks at Disney World.

Ethics, responsibilities and Corporate Culture in virtual worlds are issues better left to the “new theologians” such as yourself to quibble over.

When it comes to advertising, I stick to my guns, its the person being advertised to who holds the responsibility to temper their own gullibility.

Perhaps reminding these “virtual worlders” that their online persona exists only as a mere blip-spec on a hard-drive that’s ultimately “owned” by someone might be a more fruitful calling than trying to establish a “virtual” Bill of Rights mirrored on Bill of Rights that barely works out here in the so-called real world.

Unfortunately, trying to get these ideas across to a group of folks who list “shopping” as one of their favorite activities/hobbies or entertainment past-times is probably, at this point in history… a lost cause.

Lot’s of cultures are forced to roam the world in search of a home… Not out of want, but out of need to survive.

Some of them with biblical proportions.

Interesting point you bring up to the consequences of such actions.

thanks for the comments

I like this thinking.. perhaps they should have offered the community for sale to the kids. Perhaps they could have found a way to “port” the community to another platform rather then erase it.

It isn’t as simple as the facebook example technically, but should “easy” be a measure in this? What are the responsibilities i wonder?

Thanks for the comments