Live modeling is cheating?

Registering employees? What is next "income taxes" imposed by LL?

hehe. I did think of that, and I suggested that they'll come up with us only being allowed to trade if we have a traders license from them - monthly and annually - like the Premuim a/c charges.

After the Xstreet changes, I could really see this happening.

See all the problems that Phil's bots have caused?!? He should have never had them guarding Pandora's box!

*grins and runs away*

Damn! I missed you!

Low Prim Perverts

I had to think a little, but if you walk into a store called DV8, the models are often dancing and will offer to help you find products, use gift cards, that sort of thing. And I know they're not the only store that does that.

They shouldn't have to register. I think that sums it up?

There's no "now" about it . I've never considered anything the store owner's claimed in the ticket an indisputable "fact".

There's no name so noone is putting their credibility at stake by claiming that their employees are indeed always live humans. Lack of a name also means no one else can chime in for/against the case that's being made.

Even assuming they're being truthful and sincere they would have no way of vouching for their employees. If some of them knew that the store owner isn't around between say noon to 10pm then they might as well feel like they can slack and not actually be around but still get paid.

That would boil back down to definitions though. If LL sees "store models" as non-interacting dressed up "zombie avies" then I don't see how that's unreasonable at all since there's no practical difference between those and bots.

And yes, yes, you're going to point out yet again that *some* models aren't passive but then just be sane and call them something different that indicates that they *are* inherently active (ie store assistants) and don't have them in a position where you can't tell whether they're a passive model or an active assistant. Using one and the same term for something that can be passive and never interactive and someone that is never passive and always interactive is begging for miscommunication.

In your specific case: if you hired a store assistent then why would you have them fill in for one of your model bots? The bots can model; they're perfect for that. The live human can assist and wander around and greet in which case noone's going to mistake them for a zombie avie/bot.

Harry's statement that hosts are perfectly alright as non scripted agents just indicates to me that they really don't have a problem with people who are being interactive because there's no other reason why an event host would be fine and a store assistant wouldn't be.
Unless of course someone uses model to describe "A" and the Lindens use "model" to mean "B" in which case just making clear distinctions between each different type gets everyone on the same line.

I'm not going to quote every bit, Kitty. I'll just write comments...

Then you ought to have said that at the start, so that we all knew what we were discussing with. The store owner's story isn't indisputable fact, but we are discussing the whole thing in this thread as though it is - and there's no reason the think that it may not be.

We know that there's no way for an owner to know that employees are doing what they are paid to do, but that's no reason for LL to create rules that make it unsafe for owners to employ people for certain types of jobs.

If store models are "non-interacting dressed up zombie avies" then they shouldn't count for traffic, as I've said a number of times, but that's not what store models are. Some are, yes, but others aren't. And yet LL has made rules that they should all be registered (if on land etc....) regardless of whether they are live people or not.

If I hired a store assistant, I wouldn't use him/her in place of a bot, BUT I would *not* be safe from penalty if s/he worked without being registered, and *that's* what this is all about.

And what makes you think that LL is only after bots? Why do you think they'll leave avs that are real people alone? It certainly doesn't look like they are seeing them differently. Harry's statement doesn't indicate it. Put that real interactive person on a posing stand - perhaps one in each department, or one for each range of clothes - and then see what Harry thinks.

this is why you have to challenge LL on the rule..if you get a warning then prove they are human and are doing other things..LL is gonna look at a store model that is standing in one spot all the time as something that should be under this scripted agent..

they are not gonna believe there are 10 store models standing there waiting to greet people..
they may believe one or two are..
if they smell traffic manipulation and give a warning and you don't think it was fair ..then you have to speak up to them to get it reversed..


it doesn't matter what we think is a bot or camping..it's what they think is..the only way to let them know if these models are doing other duties and not camped in one spot or are not bots is to let them know..see what they want for proof or what you have to do to make sure another AR or G-Team visit doesn't turn out for the worst..

Live modeling to me is when "real" avatars are modeling in a store and not bots. I can see the issue with bots though not really since the traffic law changes screwed things up for any...more harm than good. Anyway, bots do not count. But, if "real avatars are modeling, then yes. One of the stores that I live model for is Alatiel Fashions. We are live and interact with the customers by greeting them and helping them find things around the store. AFK is not tolerated. So, I am not sure how or why this forum got started. But, if from LL, please really look at this before imposing another law that will end up with more of a negative impact. The use of bots does not qualify as live modeling because they are literally mannequins. But, those of us out there providing customers with a view of how the clothes will really look, styling ideas, greetings, help, etc. should be allowed to continue work as live models for any store, big or small. Thank you.

If you stay out of the main store parcel while you're on a model stand (cut out a 4x4 parcel for the stand) so you're not adding to traffic when you're modeling, then you shouldn't have a problem.

That's right. I was going to say, BUT it doesn't take account of times when those models move around the store to assist people, but then it occured to me that it doesn't have to. They can count for traffic when they are assisting people and hop back into the cut-out when they aren't.

It's a pity we don't know much about the store and its models that started this off.

We all know that Argent. We also know that if we set our avatars to "scripted agents" we shouldn't have a problem. But, the point is (or question I suppose is a better word).....WHY IS THAT NECESSARY? If models are avatars under control of real human beings why do we have to be treated as a BOT?

It's all about a few gamers of the system. Put the restrictions on the gamers (cheaters)........not the innocent.

Knee jerk reaction on LL's part? Taking the "easy way out"? Submitting to whiners? "Doing something, even if it's wrong"?

Fixing the problem would be a novel solution.

Yes, but that's an unreliable and dangerous solution. Cutting the pose stands out of the parcel is much safer.

Because LL believes they're being used as bots or campers to cheat on traffic, or can't effectively distinguish them from bots or campers, or because some bad actors were using this as an excuse to cheat on traffic and they've poisoned the well.

I can't even be sure it's meaningful to distinguish these thre cases. They're probably all true to some extent. What I don't understand is why there's a pushback against this simple workaround.

@Phil: my thoughts exactly.

I'm not really pushingback............as I've said a few times I really don't care. But I do see something that is bothering to me (a general bother, not this specific issue).

There is a bank here is Calfornia (well, it's gone now due to the sub-prim loans they embraced for a few years) that made it's customers wait outside to do any banking transactions only to be let in one at a time when someone would leave. Seems they adopted that policy after that big Bank of America shoot out about 12 years ago in North Hollywood. I wanted to use that bank because of some of their "perks" for account holders...........but with that policy in place I shunned them. The bank was treating every single one of their customers as if they were bank robbers...........that is pretty much how I feel about this policy.

Just fix the problem..........quit putting out policies that treat your good customers just like you treat your bad customers. I guess you could say they don't discriminate though.

The beauty of all this from LL's point of view, is that it naturally cuts bot-type ARs down, and bot-type ARs are something that LL specifically asked us not to send in. Users have no way of knowing whether or not particular bots are 'legitimate' - we can't see if they are registered or not. And that won't change if/when LL makes it so that registered agents don't count for traffic. At that time, we'll be able to make reasonable guesses but we won't know for sure. It all eansures that there is no mass exodus of bots, which I am totally convinced is the way that LL wants it.

you don't think that this came from all the people saying what about my models in my store that i use to show off my skins or clothes?

when they came out with the camping and bot rule then revised it to any traffic manipulation..people were saying..what about my models for my things i use for my store??

LL said they would be fine until they came up with a way to pull them out of traffic..
so people started shoving tons of bots in their stores calling them models to jump the traffic up cause there was a loophole..skin stores going to the top of the pop list..

so now they have a way to separate those things..but now the outcry is..what if my models are live people..

The only reason they came up with the scripted agent is because they heard that outcry of a lot of people saying they had reasons for the use of these in their store..then it got abused to death..
so they came up with a way they could be used without manipulating traffic..

they should have called them mannequins instead but people were not calling them mannequins when they were crying out back then..they were calling them store models..
a model is someone posing for the adds or going down a runway or posing for art ..
a mannequins is someone or something standing there stiff as a board not doing anything but showing off your stuff..



The bottom line is what LL thinks we are doing..not what we think we are doing..

Some people probably did stuff models/mannequins in their stores because of that free time period, Ceka. And I agree that it's what LL thinks we are doing, and not what we know we are doing, that counts. Problems arise because what LL thinks can sometimes be unreasonable, especially when they don't make much in the way of clear statements concerning grey areas. Even now - is a single live, mobile, store assistant employee allowed to work in the store without registering as a bot or not? If not, what about the store owner doing the same job? If it's ok for the owner to do it, why can't the assistant do it? And so on LL are no good at all at making things clear, perhaps because they don't know themselves until they've let something run for a while to see what sort of stuff comes up.

ETA:
You mentioned a loophole which I referred to as a time period. It's still there. All store bots are good for traffic as long as they are registered, and as long as there aren't so many of them that they are likely to be there just for the traffic. So forget about real people for now - use bots

i agree they leave a lot of grey..
but the way i see it is they were answering to the people that were wondering back then about their model bots..
so they answered those people with this adjustment..

they leave a lot of grey and we look for loopholes..it's not a one sided relationship..
it's not something that LL came up with on their own..
it is something the residents brought to their attention to keep their models in their stores back then..
what about our store models??
Well they will be ok until we can find a way for them to be adjusted so they don't count unfairly twards traffic..

does it take 10 or 20 assistants in a store standing there waiting to say hi or one or two?
they are not giving warnings to people with one person walking around being helpful..

seriously though..if they were doing a lot of this giving out the warnings which i don't think they are..the forum would be packed with people asking why me??

the fact they don't have a way to show us what a scripted agent is or is not says a lot..

we asked for indicators..until they show a big dent in the search or some way to see them on the map i'm not buying it..

as i have said many times before..it wouldn't take months to get this traffic manipulation under control..give me two other people and let us rip and see just how fast that search engine changes..LOL two weeks!! and there will be no grey area..word of mouth would travel faster than me LOL

Of course it does. You have to cover for all sort of languages

As far as we know they aren't doing it - yet. But it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if they do it. After all, an employee in the store shouldn't really count for traffic.

The whole thing is a complete and utter shambles that we users have to cope with. None of it makes any difference to LL because they are not the ones who run the risks. It's us who don't know for sure what we are allowed to do and what we are not allowed to do, and all for the sake of keeping those login number up for LL.

Loopholer!! LOL

i think all we are seeing is a few example cases..i don't expect much from this whole thing really..it's gonna fade and we'll accept it like always..

the way i see it is LL looks at people running a business in sl as nothing more than tier..
what we do with that land is all RP..they are the only business in town..
if we can make a living so be it..if changes happen from them we better roll with them because we are not changing their ways..
if we look for fair from them we're gonna be upset..because each persons version of fair is different..yours may be unfair to me and mine may be unfair to you..
there is no fair in the business word..only good plans or good recovery from mishaps or failure..

If we were recognized as real businesses things would be different i'm sure..

if they did not play with grey areas and kept it all black and white they would lose half of half with every decision made..it would be clear cut omg thats unfair to some..
instead we wonder and wait keeping our numbers counting as residents.

Don't get hung up on the terminology.

LL came up with an avatar flag that means "don't include in traffic counts". That's what it actually means, in terms of impact, regardless of what they call it. The had to call it something in the UI, and the first thing they came up with was "scripted agent", because whoever made that choice thought it applied to bots.

But the policy has never been about bots, it's been about affecting traffic results. In retrospect, it would have been better if they'd called it "non-traffic agent" instead of "scripted agent", and perhaps they should rename it. It doesn't matter whether it's scripted or live, whether the live person interacts or doesn't, or whatever.

If you focus on the "they're not bots" argument, you'll be barking up the wrong tree. The issue, from LL's perspective, is whether or not it's fair to include them in traffic counts, and that's the only real issue.

My solution, as I've said before, is to get rid of traffic as a means of doing search rankings. It's irrelevant. I want to find stores based on whether they have what I want, not because they have what lots of other people want.

Perhaps the ability to have a tab on the side of each place listing, in Search, that could include a list of say, twenty items the shop offers? This *might* do away with keyword gaming too. Each type of item could only be listed once. I am also imagining that each line in the list would be a hot link that could pull up a picture of the item or sample from that category of items. Lamp = a picture of their best lamp. This could be linked to within SL or refer to a website. Yes, even to XStreetSL, which would be a bit of cha-ching for LL.

This would also free up the land description for more mellifluous prose than "beds, blankets, chairs, couches" etc. They could actually describe the land or place or shop and what their aim is.

thats it in a nutshell..the scripted agent thing is not the rule itself..it's just an option that is not limited to bots alone..

the rule is what counts and that is traffic manipulation..this option is so people can still have those things for their businesses that they were complaining about losing before..

if you really need them and it's not about traffic ..here you go..if it is about traffic and you don't use this option they will let you know if you're doing it wrong or not..so they say hehehehe

one thing i would say about traffic is this..it is a good thing but it's just not monitored like it should be..
if they put the effort into making sure the abuse was kept to a minimum and had some good control or showed they were doing something with true results it wouldn't be so bad..but it's just the opposite..so if they won't do anything that is of any help..then ya i'm all for it going away as well..