Bye bye traffic bots

And right there is your problem - getting the connection - or, more precisely, getting your little grey cells to connect with each other.

"We are setting policy that attempting to gain an unfair Search advantage, by the use of Bots to inflate the Traffic for a parcel, will be considered a violation."

Sometimes- not always, but sometimes- I leave my avatar logged in hours at a time solely for the purpose of increasing Traffic numbers.

There is no definition of "Bot" that excludes my unattended avatar.

There is no clear definition of "unfair." However, the preceding sentence states, "Almost everyone agrees that using Bots to manipulate traffic (and therefore Search rankings) is unfair." Manipulating traffic is per se "unfair", which really makes "unfair Search advantage" redundant.

And there is no language that indicates that the fact that I only have one avatar logged in, rather than two or more, makes any difference.

There is no language that suggests whether the owner of the land controls the avatar, or someone else, makes any difference.

Every second I leave my avatar logged in unattended violates this new policy.

Away and shite, stealing, killing and torture is generally illegal.



I have no problem whatsoever with you calling it dishonest, this is a classic Slingism, utter nonsense. I have a problem with you expecting people within the rules to just give it up. It requires legislation for this to happen, that's why we have umpteen consumer laws. This is a lot different to me saying it's acceptable to engage in such practices. You sullied my character with no evidence of what I think.



If you're so ethically against such manipulations you wouldn't still be here, you excuse LL because it's the only club in town? That's not an ethical position, that's my position. They do things I don't agree with but if I say I won't buy from so and so because of x, I won't buy from so and so because of x, but the real world impedes our ability to take such stances. Calling attention and criticising is fine, but saying I ethically won't do this and then doing it is hypocritical.




If your ethics are based on your choice then they are not ethics, they're choices. Ethics are consistent decisions. Without consistency ethics are meaningless.




No you were pushing boundaries, you said "AR me or be damned" well that's not a direct quote but that was your position, whilst no reference to alcohol in PG existed, the boundary was no alcohol in PG, you were prepared to push it. I agree very much with you on how nonsensical that PG rating was but the boundary was set.




I would absolutely never imply that you should never criticise or challenge. My point is that expecting people who are doing well to give up the tricks they abuse to do well requires legislation.

I can't but shake my head.

Traffic Bots are FINALLY going to be banned.

And we still have a thread basically debating whether or not trafficbotting should be allowed.


Lulz.


Wonder if this will be like those gambling should be allowed threads, more than a year after gambling was banned.


Oh and Pie and Chip *high five*


that is all.

Oh wait


PS


\0/

Your point is that dishonest and unethical people will continue to act unethically unless specific laws are passed to forbid the particular unethical activity.
Yes. I realise that some people are like that.

My point is and always has been that these people are dishonest and unethical.
You seem to have some problems with my point.
What is your problem with this?

LL have now bestirred themselves so far as to describe traffic-botting as unfair. Do you disagree?
Do you thing that LL only formed the opinion of unfairness *after* they decided arbitrarily to outlaw traffic-botting?

What made traffic-botting unfair?
Was it only LL's decision to outlaw it?

I'm really opposed to prim taxes! What do you all think?

We do?
What thread is that??

First, they took away the adfarms. Now, the traffic bots. Next, they're moving all the pr0n to the nudy continent. I'm gonna run out of distasteful things to pee on!

I don't have a problem with your point, I have a problem with your double standards of engaging with one guilty party but not another but I don't have a problem with you calling it out and never have. Good luck finding a post where I've said traffic bots are an honest reflection of anything.



I've said several times that traffic bots artificially inflate traffic, do you want me to say it again? Traffic bots artifically inflate traffic.

;0 lolz 'those who do not remember history
are doomed to repeat it' ;0

Well, if that's your only issue, then it's very simple.

The world is full of things that are imperfect. This can be due to weakness/incompetence and/or villainy.

I choose to engage in SL as I see the potential in it.
I recognise the bad points and I agitate for improvements - from the most effective stance - inside.
I see that the the combined efforts of residents can change things for the better.

Your idea of a principled stance would be that I should stay outside of SL until such time as LL run it as an unblemished world from an unblemished company.In the case of something of the scale of SL, I chose to work from the inside.


I wouldn't use the same insider approach for in-world Search-gamers. That approach would be to join the places' groups and use group IMs to rail against the gaming. - and/or stand in the stores and chat my objections to anyone around.
The approach would be sub-optimal. My ass would be banned from those stores and groups in seconds flat.


There is no double standard.

This was my point effing pages ago, but you accused me of being untrustworthy for making such a point.

There will always be newbies

If you read back the effing pages, you will see that you made the point with the implication that it should in some way temper my criticism of dishonesty within SL.
It was this implication that made me question your trustworthiness.

This would be the post where I said that most people don't actually care how they find content but would agree if asked that using traffic bots wasn't fair....

Pssst.

Prim taxes should be allowed!

and what the hell is up with my ratings? they wont update properly on my profile anymore.

Lets get 20 people together and go hang out at a telehub and give negative ratings to everyone that ports in!

Can't, I'll be posting some new anti-war messages on the Jesse Wall!

Now for something more modern..

Lets bring back Ginko

cmon you know you all miss Nick P.

Now that those pesky bots are out of the way, shouldn't places with lots of traffic get some L$ bonus for creating popular content?

Oh, I know: LL should distribute little devices so visitors can vote for the parcel, too!

The bot dots are Silent Green

Yeah! And the top 10 or 20 places or whatever can get a little payout on top of that bonus. Some kind of Developer Incentive.


------

But don't call bots pesky - Bring them back!!