About ethics: right or wrong?

I didn't know you used to be able to use HTML coding but yes, they didn't reward repeat keywords the way they seem to now.

Yes, LL *could* do something like that, but they don't. I assumed the questions applied the way things are now.

That's true, but I think the analogy I used does apply - it wasn't a realistic web analogy.

So you think that hotel #100 shouldn't do anything to improve its position, even though it is just as relevant to the search query as all the others. I disagree, of course, as, I think, would most people, including the die-hards here.

I don't think that many people would find fault if the lower ranked hotels added the phrase "New York Hotels" somewhere in their pages, for instance, for the purpose of improving their rankings for that searchterm. There may be some who would find fault and to them I would say, You do it your way - I don't object.

Yes it did ( I asked Phil and he told me how )
My product page listings were beautiful !! ....hell i would have bought my own products on the back of those pages!




.

parcel name: Dances Dances Dances - Flatleys Magnificent Moves
parcel description: as many times "Dances" as fits.


Dances Dances Dances - Tango Dance


Yet the models add to traffic I have 25 dances, resulting in 50 models.

This is as extreme as I can get of course, the question is where in between the original setup and this one, we can ethically go. If "artificially influencing ranking" is not permitted, what falls under that?

I've been busy for hours and I've missed pages of this stuff but I'm not going to jump and with catch-up posts. I just want to say one thing though...

"Purity of heart" is subjective. What is pure to one isn't pure to another. For instance, if I were a Catholic and went to confession, I wouldn't be confessing any of my ranking methods because my heart is pure concerning them. On the other hand, if some people here used the very same methods, they would find it necessary to confess them because, for them, it would be wrong. However, if I did what some die-hards here do to people who use those methods, I would need to confess them as sins - my heart would not be pure in that respect. In fact, I find astonishing that one of those people actually suggested "purity of heart".

How does a person decide another's purity of motives/heart anyway? Don't know about you, but I am not psychic, and things aren't always as they appear. I don't think I can make that judgement call about another person, what their motives are.

Hey Marcel....I think you might be shooting yourself in the foot, on that repetitive Dances thing. For one thing, you've used up valuable space to be very descriptive. I think that anyone over 18, using a search in SL....and that has had access to the Internet for over 30 days, has probably figured out how to type something effective into a search. So you may pick up one or two people who don't know how to search effectively.....but then missing the 3 dozen, that do know to type Argentinean Tango into a search.

Plus, you've got people puttering around SL that are pretty hip to stuff, and get kind of pissy when they see foolishness. I think when they pull your store up in all search...(even if they used a keyword combination)....and they look over at your parcel description (they will see that in order to TP).....and they see that you are being a complete idiot with your choice of words used....might mark you off their shopping list forever. I do that a lot. No offense on the idiot thing - hypothetical of course.

You are absolutely right, of course, Treasure, but some people judge others anyway. I have no doubt that those same people would completely agree with your post if it concerned a different topic - one with which they agree, of course

I think what you've proposed, even knowing you are trying to be as extreme as possible, is "ethical". You might want to consider those 50 models though...it's going to be hard for customers to visit your store!

Well Marcel is mainland based....would be impossible at the moment! 20 would be his max! (1/2 Sim)

Well I guess there are some people (at least one) that disagrees with you Myself, I find it ethical too, though it does not have my personal preference. Like Phil, I preferred my search page back when we could use html to perk up the page. Plus I rather be descriptive then repeating keywords.

Sad enough, being descriptive, like in the examples of Mickey, gets rewarded by a place on the 20th page or so. So what we (sensible business owners in my opinion) do, is try to keep up with the pace. Investigate what others to, and react on that. As long as it keeps us comfortable. Let's say, within our own ethics.

Don't get me wrong, I understand Kitty, and even Sling. Yet I realize that we do not live in an idealistic world, so I have to use realistic methods. Keeping my best looking page, as informative as possible to potential customers, will hide it so far away in Search that there is no customer who finds that descriptive page.

Signing off now, though I will hop in now and then to check if Sling answered my question, I actually wonder where she puts the limits

Dammit I forgot about this part.

My imaginary new shop is on my own island of course, so I can accomodate 80 avatars I guess?

In reality I am indeed based on mainland, owning about 35000 sqm. Which would entitle me to about 21,5 visitors. Since the other 30.000 sqm is for sale (has been for the last 3 months) at a stunning 350K linden, I can use all 40 though, as long as it stays empty.

Surprisingly enough for some, I would find using more then 21,5 avatars on my parcel not ethical, as the new owner would pay for his/her land too

Its not so much the 40 avatar number split....as the lag you'd create for your neighbour. He/her be paying 125 USD for his 30k sqm.....and lagging him/her out would be bad form. Mainland can be a bit treacherous that way!



.

Pretty sure you can make it to first page with being descriptive.

It depends on how competitive the first page rankings are. For searchterms that nobody is competing for, it's easy to get to the first page, but not so for searchterms where a page full of people are actively competing.

I've mentioned it so often the record it's on has broken and skips like crazy by now .

For stores:
* someone searches for "keyword(s)" and gets a bunch of result
* they start at the top and click the first link
o if they teleport over +1 for relevancy
o if they go back and browse to another page -1 for relevancy
* assume they teleport over
o they leave without buying anything at all so -5 for relevancy
o they leave and did buy something +5 for relevancy

(Relevancy is applied per specific keyword/keyword combination rather than one single specific score)

And please look at the *concept* rather than stare blindly at any one random example (or the fact that it's simplistic for the sake of showing what the idea is) or +/- I just made up.

The only thing you can "optimize" for is whether or not you'll show up *somewhere* rather than *where* you'll show up because that is decided - if indirectly - by people who are searching.

You'll inevitably need tweaking but taken together over all residents you will get a good adjustment for "desireability" because each individual ends up rewarding results that matter for them and punishing results that didn't have what they wanted and across a few ten thousand people any anomoly isn't going to affect the result one way or another.

If you advertise keywords that don't apply to you then you'll automatically drop lower and lower in ranking because people either won't tp over or will tp away without buying.

At the same time you're encouraged to make your stores' page as friendly and informative as you can because if people find the page doesn't match what they searched for then you'll be penalized and drop lower and lower.

And it's largely based on what you actually sell: Qie's hypothetical "crappy low prim furniture" store *might* start out on top but it'll drop dramatically over time as people come across the listing and penalize it by not buying or even not tp'ing over.

Here's another thing LL could do that would actually be useful: behind the scenes, automatically translate all search queries into five different languages and submit the whole combined string into search. At least that way, "optimization" would serve some purpose.

I think that some of you might be underestimating the ability of an adult to plug a decent phrase into a search.

If you consider "low prim furniture" a good search phrase, from a customer's point of view ....and I don't....I think they would be more inclined to type in low prim wicker or low prim bedrooms. I think they are smart on how to narrow down a search.

Now...I just pulled up "low prim furniture" which I don't bother much with, as a few of you are obsessed with it....and I can tweak 30 categories, as opposed to obsessing on one.....
I checked Places option - this would make sense if shopping.....

First Three Store Listing have ZERO product for sale. Tons of items listed with repetitive words that are annoying, so I'm pissed - and I move to page 2. First listing on page 2.....Zero product....pissed again. move to page 3....looking better about halfway down. So not so sure that being on page 1 is all that great, on a broad category like that.

eta: keep in mind that I did not address a right or a wrong practice. I simply addressed it along the lines of being annoying as hell.

Mickey:

I didn't say anything about the abilities of adult to do things. I said that it would be easy to get a page 1 ranking by the simple use of descriptive words as long as the searchterm isn't competitive. I also said that it isn't true if the first results page is full of places that are actively competing for the searchterm.

All that will happen, is that you get the same companies that provide roaming bots for Traffic....sell there services TP'ing in avatars to buy your products through ALL search click throughs. Say 100 purchases @ 2k admin fee plus 5k spending money which you get back through the sales anyway. You get increased ranking at a 2k fee, plus additional traffic too. Gamed!

Or your Company and have several 1L products to buy from your listings! Which you know will lead to ton of sales! Gamed!........1 L Dining room set anyone?

Or you click on your rival's shop and TP over there and don't buy anything (minus 5 pts) -Gamed!

those are just a few i can think of, without stretching my imagination.....there's probably a whole bunch more!

60% of the entire SL user base reside in non-English speaking countries......maybe smartness doesn't come into it....maybe the command of the English language and the most obvious keywords to be used by a non-fluent English speaker is an important area to consider.

This is true....if you look at some of the most popular keywords like Hair, Boots, Skins, Prefabs etc.......you better have 100's of picks to go along with many keyword repetitions.
By contrast keywords like "Pirate's Costume"...you could probably hit Page 1 with next to nothing effort!



.

Was directing that to anyone who is in a tizzy about the search and the use of keywords....and trying to say.....what is "competitive?" I see competing going on, on the page I have pulled up......but are you competing with each other to see who can aggravate and piss off the most shoppers?

And I'll be fair. Same thing happened to me a few nights ago in another category. I was so mad on the first 5 pages - I went to page 10 and started there.

I think that shoppers are very much aware of how to do a search, and very much aware of what is going on when they see One Word listed a zillion times.....without any specific product for sale, with a price tag. Even if they don't know the exact reason for that.....it looks ridiculous and it doesn't help them at all, and they skip it.

I don't know how to put it into sweet words. Their intelligence is being underestimated.

I chat with non-English speaking people all day long in SL. They speak better english than most native english speakers. They can certainly type in a 2 or 3 word phrase, if they can type full paragraphs better than native english speakers.

You seem to have a hard time with the word concept: the point was a different way to determine relevancy than something that was never designed to work on tiny paragraphs (or probably not even designed to take deception into account). Practical implementation and how to counter cheating is an entirely different matter and not an issue.

Even if noone games the current algorithm you still won't get good results out of it. The alternative I mentioned is still not going to produce perfect results for any given individual but will yield good results for "the average person searching for that same keyword" (over time).

You're free to disagree with that assertion and find fault with the concept or reasons why the current system is better (for *users* of search), or an entirely different system altogether.