About ethics: right or wrong?

Too bad you only react to a small part of the posting. Delist LOK for example from search for 2 weeks. They remove their picks systems. They still have 979 (!!!) picks. How do you solve that part then?
Even worse: they read about the new rules and remove the systems immediately. No one can see anymore why those 979 people choose to make the pick can they? So all we do is establish the top pick payers.

Funny huh... apparently people ranking higher in search because they know how to optimize, are immoral, while ageplayers and people violating the adult rules do not tickle the dragons ethical sensors. How about that...

Clearly, they don't have the human resources to police the grid.
They have to automate as far as possible. For keyword stuffing, they intend to automate a rank reduction that will cover everyone.

What they can do from a human-guided approach is to punish enough people at the top of the rankings to provide a disincentive to gaming. They can hit the people at the top of the rankings for common searches. They can analyse the search terms used by searchers to find those.
Examine page.1
Zap anyone gaming their way into that.

Some techniques are blatantly obvious. A burger-flipper could recognise them.
There are reports that LL have gone totally apeshit crazy and actually employed people with expertise in Search. Some one of those can identify new gaming exploits.

Just plain removing a parcel from visibility in Search is a lot easier than dealing with suspending bot accounts.




There are a number of common systems for paid Picks. They are an easy target. Just plain zap them.
That leaves the existing picks.
Two things happen.
1) Churn - Don't count the Picks af anyone who has not logged in during the past week/month
2) Without anyone paying for an active person's Picks, those persons may alter their behavior to use Picks in the originally intended way.


Of course it's not perfection.

Policing griefers is difficult. They pop up in random places for whack-a-mole.

Policing the best Search gamers is easy. They appear at the top of the rankings. THey cvan't hide. They can't just create an new anonymous parcel.



Yes. And if they are any good, they will be found at the top of the listings-- Exposed in a shortlist for analysis.

That's what i mean...building it since 2008, we're now in 2010!.....less time here preaching ethics......more time in world putting it altogether and bringing in vendors ...and you'll have most of your Tier paid for.

No, you're right its not empty....you got like 2 tenants out of 30+ spots....so technically you're correct.

Then AR them when you find them. I don't have to be policeman for every possible legal violation in the world to have ethics. Personally, I believe LL themselves was unethical in their treatment and handling of the Adult situation, and thus I don't support their "rules" on a personal level.



*shrug* Preaching to the choir again. >.>



Yeah, wow! Who is it hurting?

Sex age play with child avatars is not sex age play with *children*. I don't subscribe to the notion that it is wrong or immoral than any other kind of sex play between consenting adults. The moment it becomes about hurting RL children, though, I'll be happy to eat the miscreants alive.

(PS- Let's not red herring the discussion into sexual ageplay, OK? Otherwise, might as well Godwin the whole thread at this point)

My tier IS paid for, thanks. I'd love to spend more time putting it together, but I have many demands on my time (not the least of which is running 2 different RL businesses, and getting ready to start a 3rd, let alone my work with the Isle, and my contract work in SL). The time I spend here in the forums is rather minimal.

I'll get it done and open when I am good and ready to do so. What's the rush? You want to rent a spot or something? <.<



I know. Helps to be correct, technically and otherwise.

Ok Be picky.


SL will benefit from removing gamers.
New merchants will not be discouraged because the gamers are commanding the top rankings.
People get to the top of the rankings by following LL guidelines.
That's a huge benefit for SL.

That's the exact same response, only worded differently.



If you debate this topic via semantics and word-play, you lose every time.

DELETE * FROM AvatarPicks WHERE ParcelId == "uuid" on the database and problem solved

Bit simplistic but it shouldn't be hard for LL to simply wipe all picks pointing to a specific parcel if that's what someone gets delisted for. Or don't delete the picks but point them a non-existing parcel.

But there wouldn't be any need for new rules beyond what they announced: "*Any* attempt to artificially inflate your rank in search results" fits all and doesn't leave anyone any wriggle room.

If someone finds a new way to manipulate search that isn't specifically on the guidelines then it's silly to tell them to stop doing that because as we see they just instantly find something else.

For instance with keyword stuffing: why let people clean up? Simply delist those who are excessively using that and issue them a first warning to stop artifically inflating their ranking. They're not going to do it again and a large portion of the rest will count their blessings they missed the banhammer and voluntarily comply with the guidelines.

Things become very simple: you either follow the guidelines to the letter and don't get "creative" or you loose your privilege to be listed and you might as well close up.

Just building on the "What about the existing Paid Picks?"

The pick Systems in-world are zapped. They can't generate more Paid Picks.
If the cash isn't coming in to the Pick sellers, the Picks may evaporate.
If cash is still flowing to Legacy Picks, then significant operators can be found by following the money.

What would be the transaction profile of someone who was paying for picks?
We would expect to see a regular stream of batches of same-amount payments to a number of individuals.

It's much the same technique for profiles camping operators.

It's a bit of database work.

LOL. You're priceless

They wouldn't want to change things people have done to their profile, no matter the reason they did it. It'd make more sense to simply not count picks for any parcels owned by someone being spanked for gaming, for a period of, say, three years. In fact, it'd be useful to not count picks for anyone being spanked for gaming search, even if it wasn't picks gaming they're being spanked for. Running traffic bots? For three years traffic and picks won't help you. At all. Not in your current store, not in your future stores, and not in your alts' stores.

Please, LL, let me be in charge of these things

I debate this topic accordibng to what people post, and you post so many wrong things, and I haven't lost a debate with you, ever. You can go to all the threads and check if you like

All this stuff about deleting Picks, not counting then, and delisting places is nonsense. You are discussing things that won't happen. Yes, the odd places may be removed from search for repeated infringements, but you're talking about it as though it's likely to happen for any infringement. You almost sound like you're getting your jollies from it - I think you probably are lol

Anyway, it's just wasted typing that could be better spent discussing reality rather than flights of fancy.

I think that judgment is a matter of subjectivity. You are obviously not the most objective person to judge your own success/failure. No one is. To oneself, one always wins debates. <.<

Personally, with a few exceptions, I think Sling has pretty much nailed you, but I suppose that is a subjective judgment as well, since I am also one of your opponents. >.>

Sling get realistic. They cannot effectively monitor anything, and to be honest probably they do not give a shit either about these details. Of course they can, with enough effort, but they won't. Just as they won't with bots, camping, and gambling. They publish some blogs, issue a few warnings, and then forget they ever did something.

Remaining are the 979 picks. A lot of them will indeed vanish but after the removal of the pick devices, they start 979 picks ahead of the so called honest merchant. even if 75% removes their pick (experience showed me that this did not happen when I stopped my reward system ), they have 245 picks left, much more then your average non-rewarder even ever gathers.

@Kitty: sure if they know the picks were bought, they can zap them. But they still did not define what is permitted and what not. As I stated in the start: optimizing is also naming your obejcts in search, naming your parcel, and description. Where does optimizing stop and gaming start? Without definition no one knows, not even LL. If today everyone removes the devices because the blog told them so, tomorrow it is invisible to see which picks are paid for and which not.

@Anya: You remind me of those lawyers on TV. SAying something completely nonsense to influence the jury, and then withdraw the comment. You too shout nonsense that you cannot backup, just to try and influence readers. You just do not have a judge to warn you so you never have to withdraw.

Whatever you're smoking. Very few people would want it.

"Be advised that any attempt to artificially inflate your rank in search results could result in penalties to your rank, de-listing from search, and disciplinary action against your Second Life account."

As far as what is permitted the guidelines are pretty clear about what they *do* want and anything that's not listed is automatically covered by the "catch-all" above without needing to be explicitly mentioned.

Of course you and Phil thrive on the whole "gray area" so you would be demanding a black/white "you can do this/you can't do that" list so you can keep on manipulating using ways that aren't specifically listed in either column.

Whatever.

Just to reiterate a point I have made in the past:

I don't consider people paying for picks to be unethical. It has positive value beyond the search engine, just like paying other people for advertising.

That LL misguidedly overvalues picks in the search rankings is a bug/flaw in their system which they can easily correct. The problem lies with LL, not the people paying for the picks.

Now, if someone uses a bunch of alts stuffed with pick-spam, that's another matter.

In my last post I said you tell things and cannot back them up. I decided that might have sounded a bit harsh without giving you the opportunity to prove different.

Hereby I challenge you, in public, to test whether the picks for Phils store are rewarded picks, by either prizes or cash, or picks that people made because he has some boards up asking to add his store.

Please let us know the result.

You emphasise product info..........i don't exactly see Product Info using Classifieds or Places Search system.! How come one can't see product, styles, prices or inventory using Classifieds and Places Search (or even People Search) , yet these Search Engines have successfully been used over the last 6 years? Why has it become such an important factor now with in ALL Search.? I think ..you're pissing into the wind, if you think the majority of folk worry about such things.

I stated i had Shop visitor counter records dating back (3yrs) and to when my listings look really neat and presentable in ALL Search.....to the messier versions now. The only variable factor that determined my visitor numbers were the actual ranking at the time....when say in the no.1 or 2 spots, the traffic was similar regardless of how my page looked like. The sales are not wildly out either

You're way off base there, Kitty. I can't speak for marcel, but I do know me, and I never do anything that would attract a penalty. There is only one chance of that happening - it's the 2 weeks between the blog and the upcoming change that will deal with keyword stuffing, but I guarantee you that LL won't delist or whatever any place for keyword-stuffed pages during these 2 weeks.

Paying for Picks ( which was created to game Search ) is like paying for avatars to sit in your parcel to inflate traffic and game search.
It's the exact same crooked process.
LL banned camping-to-inflate-traffic. The same logic would apply in gaming paid Picks.,

It is entirely the fault of the crooks that they behave like crooks.

Yes, Anya. I join in Marcel's challenge to use your "means" and find out whether or not any of the Picks that point to my store are rewarded in any way, shape or form, and report your finding back here.

Don't let the forum down now.

No Kitty, wrong.

Of course this statement is nice for people like you and Sling, not having businesses. But no business can work with this and I gather you are smart enough to understand that. What is artificially inflating your search ranking? EVERY form of adapting your html page is artificially inflating your search ranking. Renaming products for sale is. Optimizing your parcels name or description is. How clear is that?

You know I do not mind you giggling about it, though I estimate you intelligent. But at least be honest in what you say.