The Most Honest in my Field

Huh. Thanks; in fact, I hadn't seen it. (I keep getting tricked by the jive software, thinking I've read everything when in fact something new has been posted on some other branch of the document tree.)

Anyway, yeah, in just a couple weeks: "Relevance improvements. We've made some changes that will lower the rank of keyword-stuffed or gamed listings. This means that high-quality destinations and listings will rise to the top of Search results, creating a more satisfying search experience for Residents by connecting them with the best of Second Life." That will be a change.

Guess I'll go read-up on the discussion thread.

Means booboo to me. We had James' ear for a while but then got pushed off onto airing our concerns to Jeska, who only gave us Sarah Palinesque variations of the same spin. Search was then promptly de-prioritized and I don't see how it's going to be "fixed" since they really don't give a crap about it.

You remember it, but you obviously didn't understand it. Nothing new there, then.

You said it, Sling. I suggest you go back to bed for a while.

Where I get confused is that one parcel mentions the word "furniture" 142 times, another mentions it 79 times and yet another mentions it 295 times.

Same store, same location, same keyword, multiple search listings.

There's no reason for any confusion - not if you actually look at them, that is. If you do that, you'll find that the main section parcel uses keyword-stuffing and the others simply list the items for sale as intended. If you look at those item-listing parcels, you'll see that, except for the fireplaces section which contain no instances of 'furniture', the word furniture is contained in every item's description, in the following phrase - A Prim Savers low prim furniture product. I've always had that in the descriptions as a sort of ad/reminder.

You should try looking at things more, instead of trying to find fault that suits your bias. That way, you are less likely to make such errors. Or maybe you think that I shouldn't use that phrase as a description, in which case, tough.

Of course they produce multiple listings. Each parcel is *intended* to be listed seperately. What they don't do is produce multiple listings for the same targetted searchterms or, if they do, the targetted parcel is high and the other parcels are waaaaay down the rankings, out of sight where they don't compete. You're not very good at this, are you?

ETA:
Btw, I count ~79 and ~295 (260 actually) but which parcel contains 142 repetitions? The fireplaces parcel contains none.

ETA (more):
I see it. It's the Outdoor Furniture parcel. I'd forgotten that one. It actually contains 124 repetitions - not 142.

On the one hand, I never agreed with Phil's bot farm, or his vehement defense of it. This was not so much because I objected to his gaming traffic/search rankings, but because doing it that way was (IMO) a misuse of sim resources.

But I have to admire him for his skill at playing "within the rules". And even if you consider his tactics morally questionable, he does have the courage of his convictions. (No, not THAT kind of convictions!)

Someone might say that con men should be admired because they have the courage of their convictions.
Ditto for the people who dished out 100% mortgages to people who had no hope of keeping up the payments. They got rich and screwed up society in the process.


There is nothing praiseworthy in doing something unethical, no matter what level of skill or conviction it takes.

Agreed. But nothing unethical has been mentioned in this thread. Oh. I forgot. You don't know what's ethical and unethical, do you. Did you try having a nap to get better? If you did, it doesn't seem to have worked.

every single person in this thread, and world, has a different viewpoint and level and ethics. i believe Phil is well within his boundary of ethics. just because you level is different doesn't make it better, or worse. so self-righteous.

Oddly enough, the only time I've seen Phil inside of SL, I was in a boat sailing along, one of the SL rivers, and I saw Phil standing. Out in a field. On land that he had up for sale.

Me? I've only ever had one piece of land anywhere near water, and it could never be described as a field, and the water couldn't be decribed as a river. It's been up for sale for a long time though. If it was me, maybe I was on someone else's land - looking at it.

Wonderful.
You would have it that no behaviour is unethical if it is within the boundary of ethics of the person.
This would imply that there is no such thing as unethical behaviour.

For some people in SL, their 'boundary of ethics' is the current letter of the TOS.
That sort of boundary sucks big-time.

Traffic bots, for instance...
Some people here argued that they were not unethical / dishonest / cheating.
LL banned traffic bots on the basis that they were unfair and gaming search.
All of a sudden, traffic bots are unethical -- while 5 seconds before that they were not unethical. Go figure.

It was land for sale. It was years ago, so my memory is dim. It might have been ocean water. I just recall sailing on the river water a lot back then. I had this vague recollection that you might have been talking about trying to sell a parcel back when I saw you in world, which is why I now thought it was your parcel for sale. But yes, it was you.

And it just worked better to say you were in a field. I believe you might have been on a building or near a building, not in a field.

I think we agree on that, Sling. What we don't agree on is what's "ethical".

I always felt the use of traffic bots was unethical...partly because it made some places look more popular than they were, and partly (mostly) because it sucked resources. But, until LL outlawed them, they were LEGAL. Phil stayed within the law. We all (me too) beat on him for being a cad, a bounder, a sly and sneaky loophole-user. But you have to admit, the second traffic bots became illegal, Phil took them down. You can't say as much for a number of other merchants.

As for keyword Search...if I were as clever as Phil, my place would show higher in the rankings too. LL has never implemented a fair, balanced search engine, one where the really high quality, popular places show up high in the list, one where you stand a chance of finding something using any of a number of possible terms. The fact that Phil understands how it works (imperfect as it is) and uses that knowledge is admirable, I think.

I'm no Search expert, but from what I've read in this thread I don't think he's doing anything unethical. Just clever.

(Aside: How can ANY stratagem to game keyword Search be termed unethical, when the entry of my own parcel's NAME doesn't find it?)

A better term would be "NOT ILLEGAL". i.e the law against a thing has not yet been passed. It was clear that action by LL was on the way - that should have been a wake-up for those who lacked the soul to see that traffic botting was bad behaviour.
I don't see any virtue in removing traffic bots after LL ban them.
That would like seeing virtue in people who don't steal only because theft is against the law. I don't see a fear of punishment as equating to ethics.




Not all use of intelligence and skill is praiseworthy.
You can see what Phil and others are doing to game Search by keyword stuffing. It's not particularly clever, but it takes some insight to set up a bunch of prims with descriptions designed to game search.

It is clear that LL consider keyword stuffing such as is visible on Phil's pages to be an abuse of Search - and by extension the users of Search. It is clear that LL intend to take action.
A view that such behaviour is not unethical because LL have not yet blogged to ban it is somewhat lacking in soul.


LL don't have a lot of resources. We rail at them because they are not fixing and improving the code.
The management and tech resources that LL have to dedicate to prevent Search abuse could be used on other iisues.
The cheats who game search by various means are pissing in the pool. They might be pissing in clever ways, but they are still pissing in the pool.

Maybe. As I said, I don't understand Search well enough to comment one way or the other...except to say that the damn thing doesn't work even if you DON'T game it.

What is the name of your parcel?


Duh! It is set for search? and the rating is covered by the search criteria?

Something to consider.
If the parcel is Mature but includes a naughty word in the description, it will be silently dropped from search results.

Well done, Sling. You've turned what was a pleasant little mildly humorous thread into a playground for your own stupidity. "Stupidity" because you've never won one of these arguments before and you never will, and yet here you are again, banging your head against a brick wall, and making yourself look stupid in the process. Still, if that's what you like to do, far be it from me to persuade you not to. I don't want to get into it myself so I'll just respond to this little bit.

And not before time too. How long is it since I wrote to them, telling them what was happening with keyword-stuffing. It can't be far off a year. But I disagree with your use of the word "abuse". You are entitled to your opinion, of course - I don't begrudge you that . Just don't assume that it is a shared by other people, including LL. LL obviously doesn't like the success of keyword-stuffing, and neither do I, but it's not an abuse of anything.

no darling. that's why we have laws. Phil has not broken any laws, nor TOS.

I just report. You decide.

The idea of ethics = not breaking the law is an interesting one.

Any behaviour that is not against the current laws is not unethical, and therefore no new laws are required to enforce behaviour.

Laws, including new ones, are required to enforce behaviour, but ethics don't come into laws. I.e. laws are not made against things that are unethical *because* they are unethical, and many things that are unethical remain within the law, because the law has nothing to do with ethics.

I hope that helps.