Bot Count, The Estates Strike Back: 50%

I think Argent was referring to your repeated attempts to make this about traffic gaming.

How many things wrong with this statement... a bot by definition is something that is controlled by an automated process. You basically just called the entire population bots, because everyone goes afk sometimes. That's way out of bounds.

It ain't just *this* discussion, either.

No you are exagerating and putting words in my mouth. I'm not sure what you mean by "out of bounds".

You're the one using too much hyperbole. You functionally equated ticking the afk while idle setting to off to being a bot (with regard to campers). If you ticked that setting to off, then you're a bot too if you ever step away for more than 30 minutes. Out of bounds = incorrect.

Cristalle wasn't exaggerating. You said that avatars should *only* be counted as real people rather than bots when they are being social or actually doing something, and at all other times, they should be counted as bots. In effect, you said that all avatars are bots some of the time. Even Anya doesn't go that far. May I remind you that the word "bot" is an abreviation of "robot", and I'm sure you know what a robot is.

What can I say? I like bots threads, and these of Anya's are bots threads.

hey!

i robot a lot, in most cases 12 hours or more to build nice stuff for people to have fun. im mostly "idle" on my building platform messing around with prims, textures, anis, sounds and scripts. i would be counted as a bot, yes true cos i robot a lot.
LL can see my activities others will never see - primamount increases, uploadfees, ...

maybe my stuff is crap so i must be a bot, ...

Okay. I stand behind my statement. If no human is controlling the avatar then it's running on auto. Obviously everyone steps away from the computer some times. So they become a bot. What's the big deal? Bot only becomes a bad word when it is multiplied by 10,000 (or 20 or 30) times 24 hours a day for no reason other than making somone's store rank higher than somebody else's in the old search that nobody really uses anymore.

Not all robots are controlled by computer programs though. Plenty of robots are controlled by human operators. So, infact, all avatars are bots all the time.

In this forum, "bots" is a bad word, and everyone knows what it means, so it helps not to arbitrarily change its meaning as Anya did. People are free to think that bots means anything they want it to mean but, if it's different to the normal usage, it's best not to use the word in the forum without explaining exactly what is meant by it.

Interesting point But there is a generally understood meaning of the word "bots" in this forum, and it isn't what Eli says.

I was agreeing with you by seeming to adopt Eli's point of view and then exaggerating it to seem ridiculous.

erm... random sampling is prone to error. you can point out all the errors you want here
but its all going to end about 2 to 3% error
and the statistical error drops the more you sample.
so ya sure you can say "i login for hours and stand there" you are very low percentage and an allowable error

An example:

There are close to 200 million adult U.S. residents. For comparison, lets say you have a giant jar of 200 million jelly beans. The president has commissioned you to find out how many jelly beans are red, how many are purple and how many are some other color. Since you have limited funds and time you opt against counting and sorting all 200 million jelly beans. Instead you randomly select 500 jelly beans of which 30% are red, 10% are purple and 60% are some other color.

you find that with a sample of 500 jelly beans you can report that 30 percent of the jelly beans in the jar are red, +/- 4%. To further elaborate, you can say, with 95% confidence red jelly beans make up 30%, {+/- 4% or the range of 26-34%} of the beans in the jar. Likewise you can report that purple jelly beans make up 10% {+/- 3% or the range of 7-13%} of the beans in the jar.

The problem with that is that it won't necessarily fall within the 2 to 3% error and it cannot accurately be stated that it will. If you started with a homogenous jarfull of jellybeans, then ok, but not otherwise.

Thank you for reinforcing that my point a view is not rediculous unless you exagerate it.

Now this is just my opinion... but I think you arbitrarily interchange the phrases "in this forum" with "in Phil Deakin's mind".

So..if I'm a designer, and I have a box over my store, which is my workshop, and I'm in my workshop, making and fitting clothing items, then I am camping? and I am a bot?


Can't agree with that.

I sense it, not sure why either

and I have no bots or anything like that...

I just have a suspicious nature I guess.... it is the way it was presented and worded and now the avoidance of my questions...

*shrug*

people will either believe it, not believe it, or be indifferent

I am choosing indifferent
not worth getting upset about, or trying to convince people that I disbelieve the numbers presented...

So is "campers".

It's like you're saying "how dare you call him a son of a bitch, he's the offspring of a female dog".

I'm going for a rough guess of 37% bots! You heard it here first!

I don't think anybody said that.

hey!


depends on the visitors taste.
crap stuff and your a bot ¿
nice stuff and maybe your not ¿

oooooook...... i think i have finally worked this out!!


If avies on residental plots arent even counted....



52% of bots on commercial plots are bots


Now that is soemthing i could believe....

And the other 48% are.. ?