More on Camping...Is Any Okay?

Jean-Claude Van Damme.

"Take your fancy clothes and your black silk underwear, and go back to.... Disneyland!"

Yeah but at least JCVD does some good action stuff.

Bullshit.

Exactly. This really is the issue. Camping works. As you exemplified, the rental area without campers doesn't attract business because people probably look at the traffic there and think "It's rubbish". A real business test is the number of visitors to purchases but there's no statistic available to document that.

Whatever you prefer to think

Yep.

In my opinion you are entitled to play traffic bot games,

But your excuses explaining yourself are lame.

Traffic was not intended to manipulated by alts. You have to realize that.

It really wasn't intended to be manipulated by camping chairs either. You should be able to recognize that.

So either you are stupid, or more likely just obstinate to keep claiming that it is legitimate.

I'm not saying you should stop gaming the traffic system. I'm just saying you should quit it with the lines there is nothing wrong with it.

Someone mentioned that the "official" guide states that camping is a good way to make money. I plan to swing by my local Borders to see if that's true. If it is then it is my opinion that Phil and all others with campers can rest easy.

It is in the official guide so save yourself the trip.

The official guide was written long after camping became commonplace.

It also lists casino owner as a viable job.



They probably can rest easy.

Doesn't mean they are right though.

Because they weren't regulated I never stepped foot into a casino, but never begrudged anyone who did. It was their choice.

More and more I'm seeing the camping thing that way. I no longer see it as the menace I once did.

Thing is camping benefited Linden Labs and their puffed up numbers.

the conncurrency has potentially affected stability

Camping directly impacts the success of quality places in Second Life by reducing their visibility.

As I stated in my acting analogy, any successful business survives by being both creative AND having a good business sense. You play by the rules that are given. I've been very clear that I believe the current rules suck, but they exist.

I leave many places that have campers because they are excessive and cause too much lag. This to me is bad business, and probably affects them financially. Probably the little guys aren't going to compete with them anyway. However, two little guys competing and one has a few campers and one doesn't, I can almost assure you the one who does will do better financially. If the other chooses not to have campers because they think it's immoral, then that's fine, but I'm not going to hold it against the other guy at all for having a few around.

I think camping is just fine.. even used to game the traffic scores. If you arent willing to actually look for quality places, and only look at the first page, then hell.. its your fault you arent ffinding places.

I am only opposed to camping when it takes up half or more of a sims resources.

However the one without campers has less visibility.

That was my point.

It cant win out based on higher quality if no one knows its there due to the higher traffic camp place.

Why do I have to realise that? I'm dealing with a search engine - just like I, and millions of others, have dealt with search engines over many years. Do you think that search engines intended people to do things to improve rankings? Of course they didn't. They didn't intend that to happen at all. But they DO give advice, and make suggestions, as to how you can improve your rankings. They didn't intend people to do it, but they do assist people in doing it. I assure you that I'm not out of step.

I am neither stupid, as I think you know, nor obstinate, but I do have a different opinion to you. You are right for you, and I am right for me. Seems reasonable.

I really feel you are obstinate to act like its not the situation.

However you are entitled to your opinion.

EXACTLY!!!!

That's the point. That's exactly why the current system sucks. But it is the way it is. Why should someone with great quality stuff get moved in the background? Sure they can advertise and do many other things to get moved to the front. By making some adjustments I show up at the front of most searches in my category without camping, but why would one more hurt when it's being used so frequently.

It seems to be you are implying that people should be standing ground against camping at the cost of sales, which you know is really unrealistic that it would have any impact. The only time we're going to see impact is if LL ever removes traffic from significance and I don't know if that's ever going to happen.

I beg to differ. Camping directly impacts the success of quality places because it INCREASES their visibility.

You won't agree with that, of course, and neither do I. I said it because both quality and crap places are pushed down through camping, and both quality and crap places rise up through camping. To pick just one effect is unrealistic.

I do not think camping in and of itself is evil. I did it heavily, but it was just a stepping stone for me.

But where it abuses resources, then yes, it should be checked. Do people like Phil really need 10 extra links? Probably not, because of word of mouth. Shoot, it doesn't take much to reach top 5000. If you have traffic of around 1700 or more, you're in the top 5000 places. Scary eh? That's 4 links for you right there (top 50k, top 20k, top 10k, top 5k).

But if he takes it, it really is no difference to us because he is not trying to sell something other than what he says he sells. The real problem is with people using every keyword under the sun to get eyes on them, and then not selling what they say they sell.

Well said. I missed that in my comments. An assumption is being made that everyone using campers sells junk and that is simply not true.

Not just not true, but extremely not true. Example: Textures R Us. I camped and shopped - Lillybeth got hella more money out of me than I ever did out of her. I would hardly call the stuff there "crap" - and I have no problem whatsoever with her doing it. Sure, TRU has lag issues, but that is more from the vast volume of textures being rendered than it is from the few campers she employs.

Amen to that.

I'm seeing the campers/no campers thing as simply a matter of opinion but to say you sell something you don't is outright lying and unethical.

Sure, some will say the same about camping as well, but it's so commonplace that it's pretty well accepted that you can't trust the traffic numbers anyway. All it does is give you more exposure which I can't fault someone for.

I'm saying traffic should be gone.

It was intended not to be paid advertising, but it is.

Is removing it realistic? Not really

Cause Phil Linden is addicted to the high numbers.

Does that mean its "justified" - NO

It just means its as Phil D. said its "reality"

I just get annoyed when he tries to argue that because it is reality that it is therefore justified.

Because it isn't

As I said he should just do it and stop making excuses to everyone.

I didn't say that.

And traffic is used for places that are not stores.

I would argue a HUGE amount of the entertainment venues with high traffic are laggy tacky hellholes.

Another thing:

In the various camping thread, people have suggested using methods other than camping to improve traffic figures, with the suggestion that places with quality goods with naturally rise to the top (my condensed version). Such methods include things like hiring manequins, which is just another form of camping when done for that purpose. But that just means that the ones who do it rise up the rankings - it doesn't mean that the ones who do it have quality goods. It still has the same effect - the rankings have nothing to do with quality. For quality, we have go and look for ourselves.

I'm sorry you think that, Collete. I'm merely joining in the discussions because I have views about the topics. I don't need anyone here to approve of what I do, so I don't need any excuses. Heck, if I needed approval, I would never have entered the long thread