Is Paying for Links in Profile Picks Cheating?

Its not the freedom of choice end that bothers me, Ciaran.

Its the person doing the paying and getting a ranking boost.

A ranking allowing them to get an edge on their competitors.

There is already a pay-for-ranking search. It was designed for such. And when it was introduced it was explained to us that is what it was for.

The Classifieds.

So to put it another way

Residents selling their picks - doesn't bother me

People buying Resident's picks - that bothers me.



=======================================
=======================================

The Lindens were evidently telling people at SLCC that "Picks" effects on rankings have been done away with.

Thus people might be paying people for rankings and getting NOTHING in return.

That would be a bit of poetic justice.

But it is Colette, because you don't believe a person should have the right to choose a parcel in their picks based on it improving their overall SL experience, If someone likes a parcel because it pays them, then they like that parcel, but you and everyone else arguing against that right to choose are telling that person they have no right to make that choice.

Again

Its not the Selling of Picks that bothers me.

Its the Buying of Picks, and the reason the Picks are bought .. that bothers me.

SO the "CHOICE" I would be for limiting would be the "CHOICE" of those looking to game the system.

Not people's choice about their individual picks.

=======================


If it were dealing drugs instead ..

I wouldn't arrest the users, I would arrest the pushers.

Yet another grasping at straws analogy.

People have a choice on how they use their picks, that choice should be respected.

Please

I was not comparing the practice of Picks gaming to dealing drugs on some "respect" level.

I was just describing the two groups of people.

-----------------------
-----------------------


You seem not to be able to differentiate between buyers and sellers when it comes to Picks, why is that?

Because it's unimportant. If I choose to buy from a store that offers cheaper prices, that's my choice.

Picks are in the hands of the user. Any parcel that is placed in picks is done so via the individual user, all the power lies with them. It's their choice, it doesn't matter what someone is selling, it's a user choice based system.

GAMING PICKS

BUYER - the person who Buys the picks

SELLER - The person who Sells their picks

My complaint is with the BUYER.


---------------------------
Where is this confusing?

Since you seem to not be seeing it.

The seller likes the option enough to place the pick, the seller likes the incentive enough to place the pick, the seller chooses to place the pick, the seller feels the pick gives them added value to their overall SL experience. The seller has the choice.

It's all about choice and I make no apologies for supporting the concept of choice.

Go right ahead support their choice.

I don't want to limit the Seller's choice.

I want to limit the Buyer's ability to game the system.

I am not against the Selling of picks I am against the Buying of picks.


-------------------------
--------------------------
Assuming they still count. There are rumors that they do not, that Basically LL removed the ability to game Picks.

All picks are bought, unless it's the owner who is making the pick. Whether it's due to the outstanding beauty, the fun someone has there or the financial incentive, the person placing the pick has been sold on some part of that parcel.

Whether they count or not isn't that important, picks advertise anyway. People do look at profiles and they do look at picks.

I kind of agree with you Ciaran. My objection to buying picks is that it turned an already imperfect metric into a completely useless one, so in that respect I consider it an abuse of the system that degrades its usefulness for the end user.

Ahh so for "Cheating" you want a by the letter strict definition.

But for "Buying" you are willing to wax poetic.

LOL


------------------------------------------------

I object to the direct buying of Picks using Lindens or USD.

If the rumors are right,

The Lindens agreed.


-----------------------------------------------------------

At least they were supposedly telling the people at SLCC in the New Search lecture that they weren't worth buying.

Well that's not true yet. Picks sure still do have an effect, unless it takes a long time for the indices in the All search to be updated (like a few weeks).

I recently moved my club from a parcel it had been on for over a year, to a new parcel. When I search in the All search for the two keywords that make up my club's name, the old parcel - now with a photostudio that has *neither* of those 2 keywords in their parcel listing or objects on the parcel ... shows up 3rd. In the beginning, it showed up FIRST above my club listing and groups.

I can only surmise that it's because of at lot of people's Picks that have not been updated and are pointing to the *old* parcel, that the photostudio is ranked highly for those keywords. There is no other explanation I can come up with.

I suggest that the Lindens weren't telling people that at all, Colette, and that people have misunderstood something that was said. Either that or the Lindens have been telling porkies in an attempt to downplay picks.

No, I want it to be cheating. I consider false keywords to be cheating but I haven't seen a rule to say it's so.

Well lol fancy that I tried telling you they don't come right out and say things straight in the other thread and was supposedly wrong ..

You want things both ways I guess.


As I said repetitively- it was a rumor , that they supposedly said it. I did not say conclusively they said so.

interesting.

But they do come right out say things about traffic bots and ToS, Colette - unequivocal things. There are no two ways about that.

Perhaps if we had an actual quote of what was said about picks, it would help. As far as I know, someone said that a Linden said that paying for picks isn't helping. It could mean any number of things.

The particular choice that you are supporting is the choice to participate, even if unknowingly, in the unethical practice of the parcel owner.
You can argue that freedom of choice is absolute, and therefore people are even entitled to choose to commit crime. It's true they can make that choice and nobody can stop them from making that bad choice.

However, this thread is not about the choices of the Pick seller. It is about the choices of the Pick buyer.
To take a leaf from the pedantic book, the thread is about Pick Buying. It is NOT about pick selling.


There are currently three types of Pick that point to a parcel
1. Used by an avatar who uses the pick simply to say that they consider the parcel worthy.
2. Used by an an avatar to e.g tell people that if you mess with their sis then you are messing with them, or to point to their own or a friends parcel
3. Used by an avatar purely to earn L$

(1) can be taken as a vote that is appropriate for use in ranking
(2) is distributed background noise and unlikely to result in a particular parcel receiving a significant number of picks
(3) is systematic and in no way should be used to influence ranking.

Both traffic generated by bots and IBLs from picks bought should logically - in terms of honesty/morality/ethics - have no effect on ranking.
The ranking advantage gained via traffic bots, pick buying, or whatever other underhand methods has no value for the person searching. They only have value for the gamer.
LL might as well cut the crap and allow everyone to enter a number to be used in ranking their parcel. Those numbers that would be entered by the parcel owners would be as meaningful as numbers generated via bought picks.



It's cheating.

LOL

yeah sure, Phil, w/t/f/ever


spin

If I said that black is black, you'd argue that it isn't, Colette lol

You wouldn't say black is black though

You would say black was charcoal, obsidian, ash, ebony and a dark-dark brown.

When people disagreed, you'd spin and even larger web of explanations of why black was those things and a dozen more.

Half of them having nothing to do with Black being Black.

Then if someone caught you on it you would say you ONLY said black was black all the time,

Try to prove you hadn't.

The pick buyer is giving the pick seller the option of whether or not their location is worthy of a place in their picks. There's nothing unethical about that, it's no more unethical than a referral program, we've been through this before.




I note that yet again you omit picks that are put on the behalf of friends or swapped. Certainly in the case of pick swaps it's an exchange for an exchange and yet you have no ethical issue regarding that, which to be honest makes your claims that you find this all an ethical affront seem rather weak.



You're still having great difficulty understanding the concept that people should be allowed to like a parcel for any reason they see fit. If those payments allow someone to go out and spend money on clothing or a home it enhances their experience here, so they appreciate it, so they enjoy it.

That's the Colette we all know and ____ - putting words into people's mouths.