Full disclosure: this story is about two-weeks old.  On top of that, Taylor emailed it to me two weeks ago and I lost it in the shuffle.  This morning, Lump reminds me.

Along with “Hello Kitty Online” and a couple other truly NSFW MMOs, Virtual Decatur recently earned the dubious distinction of “Most Disturbing MMO” by GameSpy.

After pointing out the proposed game’s unfortunate acronym, the article restates much of what we’ve already discussed…

Specifically, you want to start an MMO where the admins physically live in the same town as the players? Really? Do you have no self-preservation instincts? Have you not seen the Internet? It is a place notorious both for its disproportional rage, and the horrors perpetuated behind its pseudo-anonymity. And nobody is more hated than the people in charge.

Forget fruits and vegetables.  Online rage is the elixir of life.

The 13th Floor blog over at Governing.com uses Virtual Decatur as an example of the “leeriness” residents feel when their cities venture online.

But just so we’re clear, I may indeed be hesitant to embrace “Virtual Decatur“, but at the same time I fully embrace Open City Hall, the online requests/concerns site, the Decatur Minute, and any future, full-fledged redesign of the city’s hefty but scattered website.

So, let’s try not to peg those who are highly skeptical of this idea as “anti-technology”.   In fact, I would bet that the more tech-savvy the person, the less likely they would be to embrace this idea.  Second Life now sits comfortably in 2007’s wastepaper basket, and was never a place where people got together to have substantive conversations.  Instead it served as more of an alternate reality for players.  Combined with an assumed high-cost, these things indeed make me “leery” of the idea.

But that’s just my opinion.  Though I guess I could be perceived as biased, since this is currently where many of the city’s online interactions occur.

h/t: InDecatur

BTW, the RFI’s for this project were due February 13th.  The next step is to invite vendors to demonstrate the project, but that date is still TBD according to the city’s website.

Obviously there has been a ton of talk across the internets about this “Virtual Decatur” concept, but I noticed that – not surprisingly – nearly all of it is just packaging and repackaging of what’s already stated on the city’s Virtual Decatur page.  Personally, I was curious where this idea originated and if the city was surprised by the amount of attention its getting from tech blogs/websites worldwide.

So, I followed up with the city yesterday and RFI coordinator Lena Stevens was good enough to reply to my inquiry earlier today.

She reiterated that no money has yet been budgeted for Virtual Decatur and no timelines on decisions have been established.  If/when a time comes for decisions to be made, Stevens reassures us that there will be ample oppertunity for public comment.

In terms of where the idea originated, Stevens explains that the Decatur City Commission thought it up with the original intent of viewing potential Decatur development in a 3D space  and the idea “branched out” from there “to include the entire Decatur experience – people, businesses and government. Rather than reading about Decatur on a flat website, users could experience the community by interacting with one another as well as with city officials.”

In regards to the online response, Stevens says that the city was “surprised by the amount of media buzz surrounding the release of the Request for Information”, but chalks it up to the cutting-edge aspect of the technology being considered.

Though the city has yet to receive any final submissions for Virtual Decatur, Stevens says that “10-15 companies have notified me of their intent to respond.”  She also promises that “more details about this project will be made available after the responses have been received and analyzed.”

Speaking for myself, I would like to see a comparison of the cost of the commission’s original idea (a 3D model of a potential development) versus this more involved and expanded one.  Because while I have reservations about the “Second Life” version, I think a place to view 3D models of potential developments from a bunch of different angles could be quite useful.   While I appreciate the city thinking outside the box in terms of communication, I’m worried that the more far-reaching version could potentially overshadow the original idea.

I’ve NEVER seen a city RFP receive this much buzz before!

The U.K.’s Guardian newspaper games blog writes up the Virtual Decatur idea, which includes this very British description of our city.

Decatur is a bit Hay-on-Wye (it hosts the largest independent book festival in the country) [DM note: Hay-on-Wye is "the town of books" in Wales], and a bit Oktoberfest (check out the annual Decatur Beer Tasting Festival). It’s also a little bit Beach Blanket Bingo.

Regardless of whether you think the idea has potential or not, you must admit that all this free publicity is quite impressive!

Oh, and congrats to Dennis over at Next Stop for getting linked to by the Guardian for his Beach Party photos!

It seems like all the big tech sites are now picking up on our city’s idea of creating an online version of our little burb.

Both CNET and Wired have shown great interest in the concept. And while CNET is concerned that the idea would inevitably be polluted by porn, Wired seems to like it.

For starters, they’d have to clear a lot of the ignorance out of the air — critics will almost certainly dismiss the effort with the classic “traditional methods work fine, so this is pointless” argument. There’s also the latent fear of computers that permeates much of society, though an argument could be made that clicking on a virtual town hall and chatting with your neighbors could be easier than attempting to participate in a forum or chat room discussion, particularly for those who can’t physically make it to the real-world meetings. It will likely all boil down to who is chosen to develop the interface, and how accessible the end result is.

And after sorting through all the tech-drool and scorn over this issue, probably the most tangible comment I discovered was this one over at Game Politics (which was one of the first to bring this issue to light)

If they want to do a virtual city, I think they would save time piggybacking on Google’s street view feature. At least for the city exploration part. And then add on the interactive landmarks in their own discretion. Google provides development tools to integrate these features into another site, so why reinvent the wheel?

Could be a much cheaper option.

After all of this free publicity, I wonder how many RFIs the city will get on this project.