Live modeling is cheating?

I'd be really surprised if most people who tp over and see someone wearing a store tag standing around wouldn't assume that that's a real person they can ask for help (to the point where they're willing to wait a few minutes in case they don't respond right away); but if they see someone on a model stand they'd just walk past and ignore it because it's unlikely to be an actual person.

Personally I wouldn't assume that staff is wearing store goods any more than I'd expect RL staff to only be allowed to wear things from the store they work in. The fact that you can talk to them takes precedence over whatever they happen to be wearing (and what looks good on them isn't going to necessarily look good on - or fit - me).

Thinking about it what staff/models wear usually influences me in a negative (for the store owner) sense: if I spot that the sculpts don't look good even from a short distance away; or if the skirt suffers from a bad case of alpha flicker; or if I notice a less than perfect prim fit (space between edges of the skirt and the mesh; skin showing through prim sleeves) or other issues then I'm not going to buy it even though I otherwise would have.

No they are not. Camping and modelling are not the same things. Sometimes they are effectively the same and sometimes they are totally different. People here are talking about the totally different models. Continually bringing it back to camping isn't helping the discussion.

Why on earth would I object to women earning money modelling clothes????

And Pep? About your own dubious past as a walking, talking coat hanger? Pics, or it didn't happen.

what if the store owner said to the models greet people and talk to them, and what if the models actually DO greet people and talk to them?



well you are being picky, afterall prims can always be modify nobady has the same shape

Since your own "store models" are bots you make my point more than anything else. The majority of models are bots, or might as well be since the human won't be at the keyboard.

Lets be really honest here: if you tp to a store and have a question are you going to walk up to the nearest model stand and ask a question and expect a response?
Or are you just going to look at the store owner's profile because you assume that the model is most likely going to be a bot?

if the models standing there greets me as soon as I land in the store, yes, I'm going to him/her and ask right away.
I on the contrary s/he doesn't say anything when I land there I'm gonna check the owners profile

My own store models are bots - everyone knows that - but it doesn't make any point for you at all. People here are not talking about my type of models, which I already said exist. They are talking about models that interact with customers. *You* keep trying to bring it all back to effective camping. As I said before, perhaps you'd like to address what people are actually talking about instead of continually trying to classify everything as effective camping.

it's not about camping .it's about traffic manipulation..If LL feels the place in question is manipulating traffic then it's gonna get a warning first..

you can plead your case and see if they will reverse it..a few cases have been reversed..

camping itself came in all forms..you had the camping where people would be on a ladder looking like they were cleaning the windows or mopping floors or sitting on couches around a coffee table ect..it's not just sitting in a chair and it can be human or bot..

if LL is looking at them as they should be scripted agents and you feel they are not..you should contact them and try to get it reversed or ask how they came to this decision..

in here we'll just go back and forth on what is camping and what isn't and what is a good bot and what isn't and you'll still be in the same spot you were before you started the thread..

Phil got his case reversed maybe you can too

And what if like so many people keep saying they happen to run RL for a short amount of time?

If they're on a model stand how would anyone know the difference between a human who's AFK and a model bot?

If they're *standing* around on the other hand then there's the general assumption that they're not a bot and if they don't answer then they might be AFK and an IM would likely get an answer at some point.

I'm going to assume that if staff is modelling an outfit that they took the time and effort to actually make it fit to their shape, otherwise why model it?

If there are any flaws left then that's going to indicate that I'm not going to be able to get a perfect fit either.

Perhaps I have made a mistake and you don't object to "equal opportunity" sexism, but are an advocate of positive gender discrimination? Last time I checked, "models" could be male or female.

Pep (My past is an illustrious thing, but of no consequence in comparison with my future.)

Oh, is THAT what you were on about??? Really, Pep, you must try for more clarity in your posts.

I am sure that Melita was merely acknowledging the fact that MOST models are women. No sexism need be involved: it's just shorthand.

So it's permissible for me to use "shorthand" and leave out modifiers as well?

Pep (So I can say "Women are stupid" when I mean "SOME women are stupid"?)

But Pep . . . you ALREADY do that . . .

No I don't.

Pep (I am very careful about the population I include in my comments.)

Sure they can, I just cut a parcel right in the middle of my shop to put the model pose stand on. The model is still in the middle of the shop, just on a 32 sq m parcel that isn't set to show in search.

IMO, I don't see anything wrong with models counting towards traffic as long as they're not AFK and engaging customers. If you're AV is in the shop, but you're at work, getting a bite to eat or in the other room watching tv, then you're no different than a bot or camper.

How would anyone tell the difference between model type A and model type B when there's nothing to judge that by?

More specifically how would a Linden tell the difference between:
- a human model who's "live" but simply AFK for a few minutes
- a human model who's somewhere else for the next X hours
- a bot pretending to be a live human who's AFK by having its profile represent a seemingly human controlled avie

If you want to assume that the models in the original ticket were interacting humans then that's your choice but it's no more or less accurate than my assumption that - given the Linden responses - they were objecting to actual zombie models with no human in sight.

If there was an actual name of a store that people can independently back up that there weren't ever any might-as-well-be-bots models but always interactive staff then that's a completely story but with the limited information there is you can't simply dismiss that maybe the store owner was actually in the wrong.

They can't do it anywhere near as well as a live model. Your example isn't what's being talked about jhere because your model is away at RL work all day. Live models can take people to what they are looking for, as well as point them there (which yours can't even do ) and answer questions as needed.

Just as in the other thread we have people mixing definitions to bolster their point. That does not help in anyway to arrive at a reasonable solution. A bot is an artificial "thing" that often mimicks something else......but definition. A camper is someone or something "camped" somewhere basically doing nothing (though that is not always true). A model is someone or something with a purpose being to display or demo a product (often being "paid". A staff member is an employee tasked with specific duties to accomplish some goal set by an employer. I see all these being mixed or lumped into one catagory.........mainly the "bot" catagory but also the "camper".

Why? My observation is merely to further a hatred of traffic count. It serves no purpose other than to continue the long held position many take that anyone who ups their traffic numbers are cheats. The gaming of traffic is a problem that needs to be addressed......but putting out false definitions of the methods that contribute to the problem makes it impossible to find a suitable solution. It's that mixing of definitions in a very broad, vague, and dishonest way is exactly what LL has done.......they ARE listening to us. Doing exactly what we are telling them to do.

Until their is an intelligent, honest discussion nothing short of completely discontinuing traffic count is going to solve the problem. And if traffic counts are discontinued we have no search function at all (not that it's any good in the first place).

Again, I'll say I have no dog in this fight. I don't care if a model has to be set as a scripted agent, stood on a cut out parcel, required to walk around chatting every avatar in a place of business. If I want a job I'll have to abide by the rules..........but I do think it's stupid and non productive to keep defining words to suit your position on the subject. I also cannot see how traffic can be done away with and have any hope of a functioning search feature.

So when they're actually "live" and doing that they can step off the platform and walk to the product the customer was looking for. When they're done, they go back to the pose stand and turn back into a mannequin.

I don't see any indication that Lindens would treat an avatar that stepped off a pose stand and onto the regular store parcel while they're actively interacting with customers as a bot.

It doesn't matter how they can be recognised. What matters is that live employees are officially being treated as bots now, and if it's enforced throughout it will have a huge impact. LL have screwed up (again) with this one, by not providing the means to employ people safely; i.e. an owner has no way of knowing whether or not an employee is registered during the time they are working. It's a full-blooded cock-up on LL's part.

I don't assume anything about those particular models. I do know one thing about them though - there is no way for the store owner to safely use them - telling them to register for the times they are working is very unsafe. As I said, LL have made a full-blooded cock-up.

I don't dismiss it at all. When I learned that the owner had 30 of them, my comment was that LL was right in what they did. I later learned that they didn't all work at the same time and I commented that, if they were working in small shifts, then maybe LL was technically right but what they did would have huge impact throughout SL; i.e. they screwed up. The whole thing is a cock-up.

What if they didn't step off the platform but told the customer where 'it' is instead? The point is that LL has made it so that it's technically correct of them to penalise anyone who employs unregistered people in stores. What if there are signs by the models, stating that they are real people and can answer questions, but they still don't leave the stands? See how silly it's become? What if there's just one on a stand in one store and 20 in another? Will the place with only one get away with it? If so, why? The whole thing is really screwed up now.

Incidentally, being mannequin isn't a bad thing, even from the point of view of this thread. Which is better better for customers - an av that walk or stands around, or a mannequin that's actually showing something at the time?

I find it ironic that I can use my bots as models because they are registered and there's never a time when I want them unregistered, but I can't use real people for the same job because I have no way of knowing whether or not they have complied with my instructions and registered while they are working. That's *really* ironic.

There is the possibility that live employees *might* be treated the same as traffic inflating bots and that both should either be a "scripted agent" or on a separate parcel but there's nothing to actually back that up.

Just because some store owner (who isn't even identified) claims that their models are "live" all the time doesn't make it so.

So now your argument is based on that store owner's story being partly untrue. We can't really discuss then. This thread is based on the assumption that the story is true - that real employees were used, and the owner was penalised because of them.

ETA:
Anyway, if my memory is correct, it's been stated by LL that real people who are employed as store models, must be registered.

And just because that same store owner employs live models does not mean that store is intensitionly gaming traffic.

Isn't that "guilty until proven otherwise" one of the main bitches we have about LL?