The notion that Second Life "failed" will be contentious here, I expect. But I want to share this article because it makes a point that is, I think, a relevant one for the Landing, how it is perceived, and how it is used (notwithstanding the business-oriented premise of the writing):

So when you evaluate the next big thing, ask the Christensen question: What job is it designed to do? Most successful innovations perform a clear duty. When we craved on-the-go access to our music collections, we hired the iPod. When we needed quick and effective searches, we hired Google. And looking ahead, it’s easy to see the job that Square will perform: giving people an easy, inexpensive way to collect money in the offline world.

But what “job” did Second Life perform? It was like a job candidate with a fascinating résumé—fluent in Finnish, with stints in spelunking and trapeze—but no actual labor skills.

I have a few ideas about what I've "hired" (ugh) the Landing to do; they're on display in what I post here. Is there a generalizable "job skill" the Landing can be said to do? (For some firms, social networks are replacing e-mail. But I don't think that's the Landing's job here. And despite the spam, I think e-mail does its job very well.)