> Second Life has real estate with strong property rights. Property rights is the wrong framing. We know this from the social sciences. The actual solution is

> Second Life has real estate with strong property rights. Property rights is the wrong framing. We know this from the social sciences. The actual solution is just ownership. This is the problem with public spaces in big cities compared to close-knit smaller communities: if it "belongs to everyone" it doesn't belong to anyone, if it is owned by the city/state/government, it's not actually owned by the people. I'm not saying framing it as individual property rights doesn't work, I'm just saying it's too narrow an interpretation and a bad analogy, e.g. because property rights can allow for layers of indirection which erode this effect whereas ownership can be shared and still maintain the effect (although a cynic would then frame it as "peer pressure").