Bye Bye Traffic Bots/Camping

I won't bother arguing with you over intelligence Phil, if thats the best argument you have then thats fine. Really this toy obsession of your is getting old. You should try getting some better material you are sounding like a stuck record.

Don't try and put words in my mouth when you cannot even justify the words you speak from your own mouth.
Fact, you are partly responsible for ruining inworld search. Fact, It was changed in part because people you and people like you decided that cheating was easier than just using it how it was meant to be used and gamed the traffic. That decision has meant that we all now have to get used to a different search whether we want it or not. Then you come on here and tell everyone how wonderful new search is, and how they should get used to it. How dare you. Then to top it off you use your belittling bully tactics again and again when people say how they do not like it for various reasons. You are a huge hypocrite Phil. Oh how hard you have been working to eliminate camping bots, hahahaha, what a crock...what hypocrisy.

You can say what you like about me Phil - I have a thicker skin than you know. Go ahead I can take it but when you are done realise this. I still will always have the higher moral ground than you regardless of what you say. You are nothing but another dishonest salesmen peddling their wares by telling lies.

No argument from me about any of that. I forced LL into going for the Google appliance, and I deceived everyone into thinking that it produces excellent/better results. I'm guilty as charged, BUT I don't give a damn. You're insignificant. If it bothers you, tough. Live with it or maybe try WoW - it might suit you better.

You could be more successful being honest. defending your hucksterism and calling it "successful" and RL is nonsense. If you cheat in business in RL you go to jail and do not collect $200. Sure, scammers, manipulators spammers, telephone crooks and salesmen might be making a living, but what kind of living is that?

You discard moral and ethical principals and offer this flimsy excuse that "everyone else does it." and "being a cheat is simply how things work in this dog eat dog world---so grow up......"

No you......

Eve online might suit you better.

Seeing a problem with search as it was and utilizing bots to skew the results is poor business ethics in most people's minds. It's not helping the problem, but being part of it.

My vote for a search tool, looks at the keywords (limited number) on the parcel only. No profile picks, no traffic stats, just keywords. Could still be gamed some, but with a report function for false keywords... not for long (with someone actually checking the keywords to the content before delisting permanently that location)

I see your reading skills need help also, I am not attributing the change in search engine solely down to you. I said partly responsible...sheesh I don't know how you can even hold a discussion if you are incapable of reading.
You know your crimes, we all know your crimes, a wandering new person happening on a few infamous posts from you will know your crimes. The only person who has to live with them is you. I hope that fat pile of money you generate from all this dishonesty is worth it.

What can I say? Do the words "I don't give a damn" mean anything to you?

And now we get to the root of what Mr Phil Deakins is really about.

LMAO! Oh it is - the fat pile of money, that is.

Let me see now. You accuse me of something, and I agree with you. You find fault with that, so you accuse me again, and I continue to agree with with you, and you're still not happy. If I disagree you will argue the point; if I agree, you also argue the point. Do you think you're making any sense here?

Alright, we'll do it your way. You accused me of being partly responsible for LL getting the Google search appliance, and it was my bots screwing up the traffic rankings that makes me partly responsible. We're together on it so far, yes? Good. Let's continue...

On November 13th 2007, Jeska blogged:-

On December 4th 2007 - almost a month later - I created my very first bot.

So tell me how you would like me to respond to you - agree with you, as I've been doing, or disagree with you because you're blatantly wrong. I'm easy either way, because I don't give a damn about you. Just let me know how you prefer it.

Wow, you really are all over the place there Phil, I thought you didn't care about pleasing me, just pleasing yourself? My motives are clear, I don't expect a response, I would prefer it if you didn't spout your BS and belittle and bully people who don't agree with you.
I am here to do nothing more than point out your dishonesty and hypocrisy because I have read one too many BS Phil Deakins posts and finally I could not read anymore about how fair you were whilst gaming the last search but despite how fair that was now you are championing the cause to stamp out bots and camping because new search is the best thing since you helped ruin the last good thing. Oh the humanity!!! Well thats me, why do you feel the need to respond?

To respond to your blog recital...the point in 2007 that you mention the viewer still had purely traffic based searches and the Places, Groups, People and the old All tabs. I am pretty sure it had no search using a Web UI. The article mentions nothing about traffic or web UI. Besides we only have your word for it that is when you started using bots. Anyway it matters not - you share part of the blame regardless of when your first bot was made because you are party to the same crime.

Oh and if it isn't a fat pile of money, then that makes it even more sad that you feel the need to cheat without significant gain.

All too personal. For everyone not giving a damn about everyone else, there's an awful lot of text on the past few pages here.

At the risk of beating a long-dead horse: Search here should be purely text-match. We know how to make that hard to game. (It's actually easier to do this without limiting it to keywords or tags or being too restrictive with text length, as long as the match is based on actual information value of the words--or trigrams, even.) This all worked remarkably well for decades, until Google got all rich and famous by re-inventing the wheel with their improved oval model.

Okay, not quite. But as implemented in SL Search, GSA is really the wrong tool for this job, unless the objective was to maximize the obscure nooks and crannies that could be gradually discovered and exploited to "optimize" search results without actually adding any useful information.

And Traffic is just a joke. If it's still around a year from now, there will be no bot-free venue-- *none* --returned in the top five pages for any sensible search string. The commentators on the jira who are defending their unbotted traffic results are delusional. They're just not playing the game right, and they will eventually lose, if Traffic remains. Or they will change their tunes and jump right in with bots. Oh, and camping? Just not automated enough to generate optimally loaded traffic, so old-style, idle traffic campers are doomed anyway.

But in addition to being delusional, I suspect the pro-Traffic folks are disingenuous. In an application with global reach, looking at a daily traffic number to determine if a venue is *currently* populated wouldn't be remotely useful even if by some magic the numbers weren't mostly bots. (Having a "show on map" button, though, is sometimes useful for this, if you know a priori that the venue doesn't use bots.)

None of this is rocket science, so I really can't imagine that S/he Who Must Not Be Named and all the other jira commentators defending Traffic lack a hidden agenda.

Yes well sometimes it gets like that, I generally do give a damn. I don't believe I have said otherwise. However I am not noted for hurling detrimental personal remarks about individuals here. You are welcome to prove that I do but I believe my posts in other threads speak for themselves. I try and keep it about as impersonal as I can, attacking the issues I disagree with rather than the people but sometimes enough is enough and you cannot stand by and say nothing.

Now back to the impersonal stuff...

My stance is not pro-traffic, not sure if that was clear. I am anti-cheating, anti-dishonesty, anti-web UI for SL search and anti- getting rid of the current style of presenting the search data that exists in the "old" tabs. I don't have any problem with having keyword based search now that it is in place. However I am not alone when I say I find the new Web Search to be far less productive and slow compared to almost any other way of searching SL for virtually anything. I have stated I will probably use SLX or OnRez because it has just become far more useful in light of the changes happening in v1.20. I also have a problem with the picks functionality as it looks like it will be gamed just as much as traffic was.

I would have been quite happy with the new keywords search in the original UI presentation.

It's not my reading skills that need some practise - it's yours. But I'll spell it out for you. Yes I do make a fat pile of real money out of it. You see now why you don't matter in the slightest - why you're so insignificant?

I know what your motives are, deary. You make them blatantly obvious, plus you state them very clearly. You're here to have a go at me, and you failed miserably, because you didn't do your homework. But then, people with only half a brain don't even realise that research is sometimes necessary. Please note that I'm giving you some credit for being unintelligent. If you really were intelligent, then you'd just be a nasty piece of scum.

Ask someone with a brain to explain it to you. In the meantime, I'll continue with me being responsible for all of SL's ills. It's all my fault, and nothing you can say will change that. I caused LL to get the Google appliance because I screwed up the traffic results, and, if you hate it, it was all worthwhile. It's time you quit SL anyway.

I would agree, but say we have 1000 apple (the fruit) shops on SL, all of them then will use "apple" as keyword, so you search for apples.. and you'll have 1000 results, now how they would be ordered? You gonna say: "randomly"... but i think that a "random result" isn't my idea of a functionl search engine (and i hope you agree), so what's the next step? It is mandatory to apply an ordering criteria to the result, pratically the search engine has to "guess" what a human is looking for, but the search engine is a "computer mind" so it won't really know what are you looking for... but it tries, in the best way that the modern technology would permit. Now guess what's (actually) the best technology for that purpose? It's GOOGLE! ...and what is used on SL? Well.. Google!

So we really have to decide between:

- Eliminate any search functionality. This is really stupid indeed... so i discard it.
- Use a search engine with a sorting method. But in the moment you apply a search criteria, che search engine can be cheated.

What i see here is that anyone is looking then for a solution that combines both: having a reliable search criteria, but with no possibilities (or with limited possibilities) to cheat. If there's ONE people on this forum that have the solution, he should stop to post IMMEDIATLY here, abandon Second Life, and go to Mountain View: there are big buks waiting for him/her. Because actually the Google engine is the most advanced technology applied to predict a searching query, it can be cheated, but far less than any other known method (because their work is aimed to offer the best result).

There's no chance you'll ever find a solution, you must come to a compromise and the best compromise is (again) Google. So (IMHO) it's better to concentrate on the GUI aspect of the SL search interface (ie: adjust that ugly pages, make it more immediate, etc.) than think about strange "formulas" that will never work.

Same old, same old *yawns*

So your avatar appears in a big white Matrix-like virtual sim with 1000 apple vendors in a huge grid. Your client generated this by connecting to every location in the search result and requesting the data for just that one object.



Google is excellent for searching textual web pages. It is a bad choice for SL because almost none of the content searched for on SL is actually textual.

Too difficult for you, was it? LMAO!

The Google appliance isn't a good match for SL, but that's not the reason. It isn't possible for any search system to search anything other than text. When people do searches, both in SL and in RL, they usually search for things rather than pure text, but the engines must always use text. From that point of view, there is no difference between using Google on the web and using Google in SL.

Phil, I am really appreciative of your past contributions as far as how search works (I even PM'd you to say so.) However, many of your postings after the first couple pages of this thread are causing me to lose a lot of respect for you. I strongly suggest you do yourself a favor and pretend this thread doesn't exist anymore.

hahahaha Don't flatter yourself, nothing you have said has proved to be any kind of difficulty to me. I had a customer support call to deal with and now I am going to bed. I have said what I intended to say and I tell you what...it felt great. I do hope you sleep as well I do Phil, Good night.

Well isnt this thread getting friendlier by the day

Gabriella, you were the one starting the insults, even though Phil seems capable of making the initial insult pale. Both of you would be better off by not insulting eachother, I guess.

The way results are presented, in Search All as well as the former new Places Search, can be improved, I agree. The way the results are gathered, is in my opinion the best there is at this moment. As long as no one comes up with a better alternative, I support it.

Now take the average business owner in SL.
They start by building a lot of stuff, to sell. At a given moment they have enough to fill up a store, and then they have to try and actually sell it. They have to be found by a customer base.

The way it was:
The first handful of results were filled be people with traffic bots or camping. So if you wanted to be successful, you had to use bots as well. Hardly I believe Phil was the first, so I can understand he took the tools to get noticed. Even though I dislike bots. There simply was no other way to get a good result.

The new way:
Optimize your parcel desciption, put a checkmark in "Show in Search", and get Picks. Traffic is not very important anymore. Seems to me a lot better then before.
Sidenote: That Phil a few of you are trying to bash, is the same person who gave the best insight in how to get good results to all of us. For my current results, I have to give him credits. And no, I still do not like bots.

So what do we have now?
A couple of people who blame us (people who optimize for search) for the fact they end up high ranked. We take the place of people who do not optimize. Well in that case, blame me for selling stuff as well, because I take sales from them as well.
Please try to get real folks. Every single one of us who wants to do business, wether it is in RL or in SL, needs to work for the results. Use the tools available to us. And being successful always means that another one is less successful. But you cannot blame the person who works to get themselves noticed, for the fact that another person doesnt. That just is not right.

Take care, Marcel

Hi Johan. I'm sorry but I have no intention of allowing silly little halfwits like Gabriele run around throwing false accusations my way without significant response. People should learn to stick to the topics, and avoid attacking people, if they don't want it to come back to them. She was/is stupid, and I'm not at all concerned with people's respect.

Oh, I sleep great All that money makes sleep so much better

Sure. But there's no reason why the results need to be presented as text, when the actual result that the searcher is looking for is not a piece of text.

Good post Marcel

But then people would game the system so that their vendor is rezzed closest to the landing point. The poor suckers with vendors rezzed outside the client draw distance would never get a looking.
Dammit ! It's not fair.




People type in text in order to search for things. People describe their non-text offerings in text.

Now - if we had a search that searched for "more like this" when you to highlight an object inworld or in inventory ...... that would be kewl.
The pattern-matching could be done by magic if the coding got too difficult.
Although - good descriptions and keywords contained in the objects would be a help for that - bringing us back towards text searching.


In the future we should be able to don motion capture devices in RL and describe things to an inworld search engine by using voice and waving our hands about.





Make it so!