A Meat-less Burger

As vegan and vegetarian trends continue, there is a chance for a bigger support against meat when people find out about the burger that helps the planet. Listen here.

Allison Aubrey reports on a meat-less burger, “The Impossible Burger,” that was engineered by Pat Brown. Brown looked into the reason cow meat has the taste it has. Turns out, it is the heme inside of the burger that makes it so delicious. Brown isolated heme in order to make the meat-less burger tasty! Brown’s start-up company, Impossible Foods, currently supplies to seven high-end restaurants.

During this interview, Aubrey did not define where she was interviewing Brown; however, the ambi sound that is playing in the background moves the listener to wherever their imagination leads them. To me, I felt maybe I was in a laboratory where Brown studies and researches. I also imagined that we were at the home office of Impossible Foods, if there is one. Again, Aubrey’s background leaves out a lot of information.

Aubrey visited executive chef Brad Farmerie who works at Saxon + Parole in New York City. The natural sound of the sizzle of the burger on a grill encompasses the listener to be in the restaurant. That was my favorite nat sound within this piece.

The last source Aubrey interviewed was a customer, Phillip Duff, who ended up criticizing the burger. This, to me, felt a little awkward in that this piece went in with the intention to support the new burger but ended with ridicule. While the ambi sound kept me within the story, my mind could not help but wander to the idea of, how does this interview add to the piece?

While we often talk about he-said-she-said as a trivial way to portray a story, the last minute customer interview made me feel as if this was an attempt to show two sides of the story.

To me, I felt as if Aubrey could have talked to someone who is an advocate for animals that would thoroughly enjoy this idea that there is a meat-less burger.

All in all, this NPR piece is relevant to the idea that more and more studies have come out showing how bad animal meat is for us. Now, there is a way to avoid eating meat while seeming like you are eating meat.

Chinese New Year Updated

Battle High School hosts the 2nd Annual Chinese New Year Celebration that consisted of performances from Columbia Public Schools. Dan Li, Chinese director of MU Confucius Institute, opens up about the program and celebration. Listen to it here.

Chinese New Year 2017

Battle High School hosts the 2nd Annual Chinese New Year Celebration that consisted of performances from Columbia Public Schools. Dan Li, Chinese director of MU Confucius Institute, opens up about the program and celebration. Listen to the interview here.

Minnesota Mom to Sue Her Teenager Over Gender Reassignment

Read the story here.

This news story is about a mother, Anmarie Calgaro, suing her 17-year-old daughter (this noun is used to describe the teenager due to the medical documents stating that the she is now able to legally be a female); however, the mother is doing more than suing the daughter. According to NBC News, she is suing county health boards, a school district and local health care nonprofits. Calgaro feels as if her constitutional rights have been violated when her daughter was able to undergo hormonal changes to begin the transition from male to female without her consent. In Minnesota, there are loose emancipation laws that state if a child is living separate from parents and paying for his/her own expenses, he/she has the right to medical assistance without the consent of a guardian.

While the story seems like it would logically follow the daughter on her transition and feelings, the teenager was not available for comment. Instead, NBC News took the story to centralize it around the mother, Calgaro (the central compelling character). The article develops the opinion of the mother through multiple resources and, what seems to be, multiple interviews/follow-ups. The mother is at first seen as angry at her child for the changes she has made without her consent; however, near the end of the article, Calgaro states that she simply thinks her constitutional rights are at risk and is bringing the law into this only to help other parents to be notified when their child is undergoing any medical procedures.

The conflict and tension can be seen through the way Calgaro talks about the issue as a whole. She refers to her daughter as her son throughout a testimony in front of a court. This is against her claim that she is doing this for other parents. Instead, this aligns with her anti-trans mindset that others within the article believe she has. The conflict/tension is also seen when she decides to use law as a way to parent.

There is both data and expert testimonies within this article – Erick Kaardal (Calgaro’s attorney), Thomas More’s Society, Jamison Green (former president of the World Professional Association for Transgender Health), Phil Duran (the Legal Director at OutFront Minnesota), Minnesota Department of Education and more.

Lastly, multiple viewpoints come into play and almost coincide with some of the experts. The experts do not only give their statistics and facts, but also they give their opinion. One in particular, David Edwards, had a similar issue as Calgaro, but instead, he decided to parent his child and begin to understand his trans-teenager instead of becoming enraged with a legal agenda.

Got a Secret, Can You Keep It?


“Life is Short. Have an Affair.” These words are just as hard to type for me as they are to say. It baffles me that such websites are created that will only ensure couples to tear apart. Multiple questions have risen in my head: “Are technological advancements deteriorating the public?” “Have morals over the centuries changed?” “Is technology to blame for websites such as these?” “Has media influenced the public for this to be socially acceptable?” “What ethnicities are most likely to use this site?” One thing is for certain, Ashley Madison’s name will go down in history.

I had not heard of this scandal until a conversation with Professor Heather Asbeck. While revising my first draft for the fourth essay, she mentioned the Ashley Madison scandal and how Josh Duggar was involved. I remember Duggar being on the news and hearing how he has betrayed the Duggar name, but I wasn’t certain of why or how. I began to do some research on the website and found shocking results.

Ashley Madison is a website created specifically for people that want to continue dating while also having a spouse or significant other. All of this information was held in secret, however, through Ashley Madison’s database. Unfortunately for the cheaters, a hackivist called “The Impact Team” hacked into Ashley Madison to release personal information about the users. The Impact Team claimed to have wanted to help release the cheaters, but it seems they may have had some business motivation. The group allegedly dumped the user information onto the “dark space” on the Internet (E! Online). CEO, Noel Biderman resigned shortly after hackers released the identities of over 37  million users. This could be due to failure to protect user identities or because The Impact Team released a statement that accused Ashley Madison of not removing users’ credit card information from their database as they promised to.

For multiple years, Ashley Madison was flourishing mostly in The United States and England. It then began to grow to most of North America and Europe. By 2012, Ashley Madison had reached Australia and South America. Finally, by 2014, this company had reached nearly every country. North America was, however, by far the most potent in using the online dating site. The continent with the least interactions was Africa. Looking at these two continents allowed me to easily distinguish an evident difference – North America is technologically advanced. Although there are other aspects to that debate, the most prominent would be the advancements North America possess. Africa is known as a poverty-stricken continent; however, there are wealthy and flourishing areas. An ethical question that I thought of would be the value of relationships to each culture. Does North America stray away from the devoted relationship that was established as a norm? Have these norms radicalized and how? Through technological advancements?

To break down the website even more, nearly 86% of users were males while only 14% were female (binaryedge). What does this say about gender roles? Are females more likely to be loyal than males?

Age distributions also got released. The ages that were most prominent on Ashley Madison ranged from 18-33 year olds (binaryedge). To me, this is the most immature time for couples, which is a little easing to my mind; however, it still does not make it right. Maybe the fact that people have yet to start a family so they do not worry about staying loyal. Or maybe there is too much pressure around these ages to find “the one” that it scares people into cheating. I have realized there is a new age that most couples are to get engaged. In the 1950’s, the average age of the first marriage ranged from 20-22 years old. In 2010, that number jumped to range from 26-28 years old (InfoPlease). The gap in first marriages can be applied to the site because the users may be less likely to marry their significant other at that age they are using the site.

The most fascinating, but also guessed by me, fact I learned about the Ashley Madison case is that the users were predominately white. Over 14 million users were white while another 11 million did not specify. All other ethnicities did not even come close to the amount of white users. The next ethnicity to come was Latino at less than 2 million (binaryedge). What does this same about Caucasian people?

From my discoveries, I found that most users on the Ashley Madison site were white males from North America that ranged from 18-33 years old. This speculates as what I would refer to as the stereotypical cheater. Although additional research and field studies would need to be conducted in order to understand how morals change from age, gender, and culture, it is safe to say that Ashley Madison’s death was a blessing.


Finn, Natalie. “This Ashley Madison Madness.” E! Online. E! Entertainment Televison, 28 Aug. 2015. Web. 2 Dec. 2015.

“Ashley Madison – A Final Analysis of the Data.” BinaryEdge Science and Technology. Disqus, 31 Aug. 2015. Web. 02 Dec. 2015.

US Census. “Median Age at First Marriage.” Infoplease. Sandbox Networks Inc., n.d. Web. 02 Dec. 2015.


Since we have not had a discussion in class this week, I have taken the time to talk about current events – specifically, Anonymous.


I had first heard about Anonymous when they became an active interest on Twitter. Their efforts, in this circumstance, dealt with an issue on massive deaths in a Middle Eastern Country. I cannot remember the particulars because it was quite some years ago; however, I took an interest in them back then and I am now reemerging my interest.

Recently, Anonymous made an announcement that they were coming for ISIS. They claimed to “not forgive” and “not forget,” as in their slogan. I was scrolling through Facebook when I saw their video. I watched it intently trying to grasp their mission. I understood, through the video, that they wanted to put a stop to ISIS, as many people want, but what was fascinating to me was their sense of patriotism. I remember Anonymous being a group that was only interested in bringing about the truth. I never understood their goal or mission in the first place. I had a small background knowledge that they were independent and for themselves. I wasn’t quite sure if I was right in my accusations, so I researched them.

Anonymous was formed in 2003 but never truly began their mission until 2008. Their mission is to enforce the Constitution and the “fight for Internet freedom and the freedom of speech,” (w3bsecurity). Their missions have varied from exposing rapist acts, shutting down racist influences, verifying company frauds, attacking Church of Scientology, slamming Westboro Baptist Church, and having multiple missions across the world to protect citizens. The interesting thing about Anonymous is that they are a collaborative group of people who cannot be traced or tracked to any specific location, holds no official, and shows no pattern. They work undercover and in secret to deface the threats they see each nation facing.

From what I have uncovered thus far, Anonymous have only used their powers for good. Although they have tapped into illegal zones, they have only done so to expose the truth to the nations. They are known as hackivists and they are a mysterious group that only proves to act when help is needed; Anonymous certainly knows its way around computers and Internet. They saved a 15 year-old girl from a rape case where the government were letting the perpetrators free; however, Anonymous hacked the files of the case and exposed the evidence needed to prove the perpetrators guilty. They have also hacked Mexican drug cartels and child pornography sites. It seems they work to take down home pages of influential people to expose the truth.

I still have a lot of questions that cannot be answered for the time being. There is a rumor going around that they just took down 5,500 ISIS accounts in their attempt to stop them. It seems that this legion works to enforce the proper freedoms that they believe are to be upheld. Although they may be seen as criminals, they are just exposing secrets that can hurt millions of people. If you don’t want to get caught, don’t do it – especially on the Internet.


“Anonymous (group).” Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, nd. Web. 18 Nov. 2015.

Love, Dylan. “8 Things That Anonymous, The Hacker ‘Terrorist’ Group, Has Done For Good.” Business Insider. Business Insider, Inc, 27 Apr. 2013. Web. 18. Nov. 2015.

Syrmopoulos, Jay. “Anonymous Takes Down 5,500 ISIS Accounts – 24 Hours After ISIS Called Them.” The Mind Unleashed. The Mind Unleashed Inc, 17 Nov. 2015. Web. 18 Nov. 2015.

“Who is Anonymous.” W3bsecurity. W3bsecurity. n.d. Web. 18 Nov. 2015.

Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death

In this week’s blog, I have decided to focus on the influence of peers on the current Mizzou climate following President Wolfe’s resignation followed by Chancellor Loftin’s resignation in effect at the end of the school year.

Prior to Wednesday:

I support the rights of all students to feel safe and protected in Mizzou. The events that have escalated were portrayed on innocent souls by individuals and/or groups of people. The silence that Wolfe has decided to instate in no means help the cause for a radical change on campus. Before coming to Mizzou, I understood I would be people from all around the nation and world. The school is known for its journalism program which is already inviting all nationalities and lifestyles. If a student comes to Mizzou without an open mind, that is when oppression comes into play. I feel as if it is a duty of Wolfe to make notice of the terrible racists acts happening on campus. No single person should feel ashamed or oppressed to go to school. Students are already paying thousands of dollars to get educated; therefore, there needs to a be a stand on what is appropriate/allowed in the campus and what is not. Clearly all types of oppression are not acceptable in society. Wolfe should have listened to the people and showed some kind of plan of reform for the campus; however, he lacked the ability to follow through with the demands of the students.

Some speculate that Wolfe only resigned because the university would lose thousands and thousands of dollars if the football team refused to practice or play. If that is what truly happened, I am disgusted and embarrassed to say I go to school at such an institution. Although football is a mass income for the school, there are more important things happening to innocent people. The world is built on money and run by money.

Why didn’t Wolfe take that opportunity to defy the laws and regulate a sufficient institution for all peoples? He chose to side with business, which most royalties do. This could be for family reasons or for his own benefit. He saw a way out that seemed like it could be viewed as his support for the student or, if we truly uncover the truth, it can be seen as a coward act by a man who is too afraid to stand for what’s right. Being the head of an institution limits the amount of freedom of speech; however, if he is in such a high placement, there should be no thoughts of discrimination to anyone. He was suppose to be trustworthy and the people’s person. Instead, he proved to be a follower.

The demands given by the students, in a sense, are a bit unreasonable. The increase in colored staff is not a decision for any executive member. It is the university’s priority to establish the most educated and exceptional staff members. There is no way of keeping a high status and education level when the establishment is forced to hire unequipped staff members. I am in no way trying to oppress anyone, but there is still a need for qualifications and if one member reaches those qualifications, they cannot be punished based on their skin color or lifestyle.

I support the movement, not the moment. I want to see change in behavior on campus, but it cannot be done through firing all of the executive board. Calling such attention to Wolfe created a campus wide climate that encourages unity – which is the ultimate goal. If little actions can be called out as unnecessary and the proper consequences imposed on the perpetrator, I believe we can solve the problem. There is still a long movement ahead, but as we unite closer, we become one step closer.

Post Wednesday:

It is no longer a matter of getting executives out of office, but the problem lies within people. From the recent catastrophic events, it has come to my attention that racism is just as much a threat in previous years as today. Although the percentage of racists have decreased, speaking from Civil War times, there is still a present and real threat for my friends.

Coming from a diverse hometown where racism was not present in any shape like Mizzou’s climate, I did not have the thought or creativity to even imagine such frightening people existing. I do not even have words to express my feelings. I feel as if everything is happening so fast: the protests, hunger strikes, actual abusive people. Being a freshman is the most stressful at this moment in time because I am still acclimating to how to live away from home, with people I don’t know, and taking on a new course of learning. I am worried for my friends and I wish this would all end; however, it is a movement, not a moment.

Revisions mean Understanding

In modern times, drafts have denounced from their once hierarchy position and are belittled to a peasant. By this, I mean that drafts are out and Word is in. Word document has accumulated popular demand by the applications that it continually improves on for editors and writers alike. Features such as spelling and grammar check, comments, track changes, built in thesaurus, and more, accommodate the most basic writer in his piece. How is this going to affect future generations? The kids of the future will not have to worry about having to spell completely nor look for correct sentence structure with the modern Word document. I cannot imagine what improvements technologists have in store for the future Word. Technology is dumbing down the English language while building science skills.

In Dave and Russell’s “Drafting and Revising,” they brought about this point I am now conceiving. The way drafting has changed is radical. Technology has overrun students with this idea that the computer is a self-editer. The need for a printed copy seems outdated in a sense. Although research depicted no drastic improvement with hard or electronic drafts, the real question that should have surfaced is: what is true and what is false? Truth of the matter, “handwriting may teach students how to revise better,” (431). Through handwriting, the computer cannot operate for us – our brains would have to turn its wheels. The revision is necessary and practical, yes, but it is what we learn from revisions that make us true authors. The English language cannot be applicable unless revisions are taken seriously and understood completely. Any person can take words and make a sentence; however, that sentence can be manipulated to mean anything unless the correct context is used – which is where revision rests. With the use of revisions, it is understood that the student understands the assignment and completes it fully.

Now think about the future. To decipher what is practical in the future, one would need to call for a vision of the cyber era. This new world is complex and every corner is coded with the latest technology. Doors are now activated with synchronized combination patterns of numbers and letters. The cameras that linger on the rooftops are protruding and retracting as desired. Television sets are more than 3D but 4D in all senses. The control is within the swipe of a hand, and as for computers, they run the world. The computer is the one thing that holds every piece of information about each person. Every social security number, every transaction, every conversation is locked away in the database.

Looking back at the big picture, this era is run by technology. Clearly, the skills applicable for this world would be science; however, language, has decreased to a minimal. The spoken language is merely all the citizens need. There will be computers that can read the consumer’s thoughts and put them onto paper. If there is a need for a more complex vocabulary, the touch or verbal command with correct the mistake. The computers hold the language while the people merely live in it.

The relevance of this? Word document. The extremity is unlikely but not out of the question. This is just a call to action. To rethink the way drafting is done. Can we let computers control our thoughts and dumb us down back to the cavemen era? Multiple tribes are developed in a fashion where language is only spoken and, sometimes, depicted with symbols. I see that being the future – reversing time and replaying history.

Although it is clear that extensive research is needed to better understand what is being learned and what is being dismissed with the arrival of advanced technology, it is understood that we must “theorize how students’ conceptions and practices of revision are shaped by the intersection of technology,” (430). If we are to understand the English language, revisions are necessary. Can technology also be beneficial? That is controversial. The Internet makes it nearly impossible to know if these are ideas are original or preconceived by another source. It is also unknown to what extend a student relies on the computer and Internet to produce his story. With technology quickly advancing, research needs to begin on what must be concrete in English classes and what must be dismissed. An obvious answer would be to prohibit computers as writing tools until later years, but that alters the future of the children and the dependability on the technology era. This idea is left open to suggestions and not limited to what is referenced. Students are “affected” by “writing processes and their conceptions of writing,” (430). If the world turns digital, the English language will no longer be a hard copy but a rough, electronic draft.􏰁􏰅􏰆􏰙􏰋􏰎􏰍􏰎􏰅􏰏􏰄􏰖􏰁􏰘􏰄 􏰍􏰃􏰁􏰕􏰚􏰄 􏰉􏰍􏰈􏰆􏰃􏰅􏰍􏰉􏰄􏰚􏰐􏰙􏰄 􏰍􏰐􏰄 􏰋􏰃􏰂􏰎􏰉􏰃􏰄􏰛􏰃􏰍􏰍􏰃􏰋􏰜􏰄􏰁􏰅􏰆􏰙􏰋􏰎􏰍􏰎􏰅􏰏􏰄􏰖􏰁􏰘􏰄 􏰍􏰃􏰁􏰕􏰚􏰄 􏰉􏰍􏰈􏰆􏰃􏰅􏰍􏰉􏰄􏰚􏰐􏰙􏰄 􏰍􏰐􏰄 􏰋􏰃

Land of the Free?

“You are being watched. The government has a secret system, a machine that spies on you every hour of every day,” is the intro of the series Person of Interest. This secret system intercepts every single transaction, movement, or progress of Americans. Michel Foucault describes the perfect surveillance mechanism through the Panopticon, which was used during the Plague. This same idea was featured in modern times through surveillance cameras, location finders, cell phone calls and messages being recorded, transactions stored, and even social media updates. American government has kept this idea of Panopticon to locate and document citizens at all times. Government has invaded the privacy and freedom of Americans across the nation.

The picture above depicts the concept of Panopticon through mockery. The ‘O’ in Panopticon is illustrated to replicate ABC. ABC controls a network of technology that citizens use on a daily basis. Through their monopoly power, Americans have been hypnotized to believe the norm is being fed lies and under constant supervision. Although there has been terroristic threats throughout the nation, government has made it their duty to mark every American as guilty until proven otherwise. Through their theory, they have turned a free nation into a prison. The picture also marks humans as worms as if we are belittled to overpopulated maggots that only eat and desecrate. This depicts how government and monopolies view us. According to them, we are insignificant and gullible to believing the lies portrayed in media. The televisions only emphasize the idea that Americans are fed lies through services like ABC. I believe that behind networks like ABC are more powerful people who closely work with government officials. By that, I mean the companies will present the material that needs to be distributed to the citizens thus conducting the brainwashing effect.

The Panopticon is constructed in this idea that the prisoners cannot see each other nor the guard in the tower; however, the guard could be watching them at any time. In modern times, prisoners are citizens and guards are government officials. From what I have interpreted from Foucault’s claims is that the government believes a “prisoner should be constantly observed by an inspector,” (201). Therefore, Americans cannot go out of the country without documentation and cannot leave the state without needing to have a check point – whether it’s a gas station or TSA. The location of a human is always documented because even if there aren’t those check points, there are still cameras and cell phone frequencies that give away a hiding place.

That makes me think: why is it so hard for police to locate a criminal if they can easily access their location through the multitude of technology? Is it a scam? How is the government using the information they have obtained? The scam could be this idea that Americans are not free. Although the nation is tamed, in a sense, the government ensures this through surveillance. The government could also act as a paranoid authority waiting to capture a perpetrator. The idea of their surveillance is for “those who take pleasure in spying and punishing,” (202). Government directly falls under that category. The technology they use is intended to protect the good of the human race. Therefore, they must take pride in spying and punishing. The government is led on nothing but “the curiosity of the indiscreet,” (202). They feel as if it is valuable to document all acquisitions to accustom to their idea of freedom.

Presumably, through the rise of technology, the idea of free has been altered. No longer are our amendments upheld. The Fourth Amendment states unreasonable searches and seizures are only enacted with warrant or probable cause. This amendment is not even an important asset when they is no privacy. There will always be a probable cause since there is significant evidence through surveillance technology. Although this does stop crimes, it also instils fear in all citizens making the safety factor decrease – even though the primary idea could have been to ensure safety. The new technology also creates problems with innocent citizens who are accused based on false pretenses in some cases. For example, if a citizen decides to buy products that could be marked red for security purposes, the government has reason for a search or seizure even if it was an innocent purchase.

Therefore fellow readers, are we free? Has government adapted the idea of Panopticon? You decide. The only rational reasoning for government’s need to invade privacy is for the “knowledge [that] follows the advances of power,” (204). If the government holds power over us, they hold the world. Anything they need, we are at their feet. There is a line that needs to be drawn. How long will it take until the nation finds itself entangled in their own lives?

VR vs RL

In a “Tinysociety” lived people from across the nation that worked together to escape reality. The use of this tiny society was through a program called LambdaMOO. Within this virtual world, people had the ability to illustrate themselves as they wanted and become any person they wanted to be without affects on the real world. Where does the real world and virtual reality collide though? In Julian Dibbell’s “A Rape in Cyberspace,” the author examines the crimes of Mr. Bungle and Dr. Jest to uncover the truth about societies.

Within LambdaMOO, many users believed they could finally create a sustainable world where they are genuinely happy and excited to go to. As there could be troubles in the real world, as soon as the user logs into their character, they become that character. I knew a guy named Mason who struggled a lot with social interaction. He was socially awkward in some aspects and didn’t truly enjoy the human interaction that he encountered at school. He was different and was judged on his appearance. He told me almost every day that he was so excited to get home and play World of Warcraft because he could finally be around people that liked him for him. Not only did his online friends share a common interest, but they had no way of judging him based on appearance. On top of that, the socially awkward comments were less likely to accumulate because he felt comfortable typing instead of confrontation. With societies like LambdaMOO, the users have the same ability to build themselves the way they want to and not be judged based on appearances or social anxiety.

The downfall that comes with these virtual societies is that they can be easily interrupted by the same mean people that are faced in the real world. In Dibbell’s piece, an incident that has been titled as “rape” invades the privacy and civility most users thought were practical. Exu the victim of Mr. Bungle’s rape, states, “I trust people to conduct themselves with some veneer of civility,” (6). These virtual worlds are places that most users established as safe communities. It was unlikely that someone wishing to do harm to the community would even enter such a place as LambdaMOO; however, as all societies virtual or real, there are those people that will interrupt the safety of a community for his or her own amusement. This is where the lines of VR and RL connect. There is never an escape from the real world because there will always be the same instances.

The community of LambdaMOO thought that “toading” Mr. Bungle would suffice; unfortunately, the character only arose again as a new character named Dr. Jest (18). One main difference to point out, however, is that the two characters – Mr. Bungle and Dr. Jest – were played by two different people. Mr. Bungle was sought out as a joke to harass the virtual world for their own amusement; however, Dr. Jest returned as a single student getting off on a strange fetish.

What surfaces with the discovery of such incidents like the LambdaMOO one is that there is truly no escape from the real world. With every society comes choices on how to act. Personally, I believe that virtual worlds only amplify the dystopian societal aspect. If there truly are no consequences for such behavior, what stops the perpetrators from perpetrating. The freedom that reigns in the virtual world is untouched by governmental intervention; therefore, there will be no democratic society. Although it is possible to ban such behavior by eliminating a character, it is very easy to reinstate one’s self just as Dr. Jest did.

So the collision happens at the very beginning. Imagine, with an unbiased opinion, someone is reincarnated. They have all the rights to do what they want and become who they want. They are new again and are building a name for himself or herself. That is what LambdaMOO allows. A new name and identity for every user that interacts – of course the only differences are, again, the legal actions. The everything is similar between the two societies except for the governmental structure.

It is important to remember that there will always be a problem with communities whether they are real or virtual. The “freedoms of expressions” cannot be banned and therefore acts will always be disapproved by some party (28). The freedoms that are allowed to be expressed prevents a utopian society to form. The author was wrong to think that there were “truer” and “more elegant” things to find on LambdaMOO (28). The escape from the real world does not mean the virtual world will take away all the craziness you disapprove of. It means there is an even more likely chance for destruction to happen because as Dr. Jest and Mr. Bungle thought, there are no legal consequences to their actions since after all, it is just a virtual world.