where can I find pick camping places ?

You are confusing 'progress' with 'degradation'.

correction....

you are talking about your morals, your definition of honesty and integrity, your opinion of what is right and wrong for the picks and how they are used

you are not speaking for the rest of us...

only for yourself...

just because you think it is wrong and dishonest, doesn't mean others feel the same way

there is no right or wrong here, until LL deems it so... (and I am not speaking on a moral right and wrong, I am speaking TOS right and wrong)

We're talking about picks Sling. Not everyone has a problem with paid links. You really need to grasp this simple concept, it is up to the people running the search engine to define what is and isn't allowed. Yahoo and altavista disagreed with Google on the issue of paid links, if you use Yahoo even today the top results will be paid ones, they now highlight they're paid but they are the top results.

"..they now highlight they're paid."

That's the key point.

With paid picks, there is no indication that the ranking is due to payments.
Google say the need to differentiate the paid listing from the 'merit' listings.
Other engines came around to that conclusion.

Without that differentiation, the perception of the user is that the listings can not be trusted as being the most relevant to their query.

'You really need to grasp this simple concept'.

And you are not speaking for the rest of us ..

only for yourself ...



no right or wrong until LL deem it so?
LOL!
Since when did LL's TOS define morality?

exactly I am speaking for myself
(I never once said I was speaking for anyone else, I simply said I wish you would not speak for all of us in saying what is right and wrong)

I hope others come here and speak for themselves too, instead of you speaking for the whole

your posts read as though everyone thinks the way you do, that THIS is how it is, etc

when in fact, each and every one of us can only speak for ourselves

please don't try to cram and ram your morals down the throats of the rest of us, by making it seem as though we are immoral and bad and evil, and cheats etc, because someone chooses to pay another person for placing their store (or whatnot) in the picks section of their profile

last I knew, the picks were ours to do with as we see fit

if a person chooses to charge for placing someone's store in their picks, what is wrong with that??
oh! wait a sec....that's not it... it is the ones who are paying... not the ones getting paid who are bad... right?

what is everyone suddenly said... no one gets in my picks without paying me for that spot....

would it still be a bad thing for people to pay for picks placement???

I have no idea why you are so hell bent on convincing folks that paid picks are evil, bad, immoral, cheating. etc


as for the TOS defining morality.... did you not read my entire post?????
here let me put it again... just to make it clear

"there is no right or wrong here, until LL deems it so... (and I am not speaking on a moral right and wrong, I am speaking TOS right and wrong)"

got it?? I am not talking about morals.... I am speaking TOS, because bottom line, THAT is what we have to follow in SL (some folks have zero morals and don't give a rat's ass how bad or immoral you might think they are, so morals really do not weigh in)

in the case of paid picks... as far as I know, it is totally legal within the TOS to pay for a picks placement...

Now once again, notice I am not speaking about morals here... THAT is a totally different subject that is neither right nor right. morals are just that and everyone has different definition for what they deem morally right and wrong.

Sling get real, the only reason is that Google is King of the search engines, they sell links ffs.

Ciaran, do you mean that they sell advertised places or do you mean their being fairly complacent to the fact that they game their system because the latter is undeniably true about LL and SL since LL refuses to act on gaming of search although the former wasn't an issue until recently with the new search since before then classifieds weren't included in search results and existed as part of essentially an entirely different system.

I'm staying out of this whole argument of whether it's right or wrong despite the fact that I have "views" on the matter since I've had enough stupid arguments with people lately on these boards. This is just a simple request for a clarification of what you meant.

Classifieds appear to the right. What I'm saying Gordon is that Google have a big thing about paid links not being relevant whereas other search engines didn't until Google became the dominant force. A paid link can still be relevant. The real issue is keyword stuffing and people advertising services they don't offer, that's the problem with search.

Google sell links, I'm signed up to adsense, but the links on adsense aren't links I choose. Google even concede that paid links are a normal business practice.

It's upto the people running the search engine to set their own criteria. Linden Lab advised business owners that picks were important, inducement was therefore inevitable.

Wrong.
The TOS is just something we have to avoid contravening or face actions from LL.
That's all it is.
It is *not* "what we have to follow" in SL.

The TOS has no bearing on whether the practice of paying for picks is honest or not.

I don't understand why you bang on about the TOS. It must be perfectly clear to you that I do not consider the TOS to be a guide to morality. I don't see it as relevant to the discussion.

Thanks for the clarification.

It's possible for the tone and manner in which a person makes a case, and the number of times they present it, to harm their case instead of helping it.

I'm not confusing anything with anything. Times change and you need to keep up instead of fighting battles that were lost a long time ago.

Sling. Your battle is lost and your arguments are lost. It's time for you to get up to date about Picks. LL decided to change what they were originally intended for. People had already changed it by using them to display people and not just places, and then LL changed it again by using them for ranking purposes. Picks ain't what they used to be, Sling, and your views are way out of line with the new reality that LL introduced with the change.

because once again I am not talking about morals, I am speaking strictly about if the TOS allows folks to sell their picks locations

and yes the TOS IS what we have to follow in SL, or we will be kicked out

not sure what part of that you do not understand

*shrug*

I have not voiced my opinion or views on the morality of it all, nor will I, because it has no bearing on the point I am trying to make

and that is....
as far as I know, it is perfectly legal according to the TOS to sell your picks locations.

not sure why you bang on about morals, when that is not what I was referring to at all

I guess we are making points about two different things here

(mine being totally about the legality of it, and nothing to do with the morality of it)

Wrong again Phil.

What you appear to be asserting is that the reality of people gaming search is something intended by LL and/or something to be welcomed or approved of.

There are many things in SL and RL that are realities.
Are you suggesting that all realities should be simply accepted?

Ad-farming was a reality. It's going.
Gaming of traffic is a reality. It's going - because the payback for it is going.
Gaming of Picks is a reality. Why should that not go also?

this comment has me wondering now....

what if they did intend for folks to pay for picks... as a way to keep the lindens flowing throughout SL....

I find it hard to believe that they never once thought that folks might buy picks from other ppl... they must have thought of that possibility at one point or another...

same with camping.. I am sure that they knew it would be paid for as it is.. just another way to keep those lindens flowing

now.. before anyone jumps on me...
I am not saying it is right or wrong, morally or otherwise...

just a thought that occurred to me... that's all

Anyone who has to manipulate search results is admitting defeat. If it's a venue the owner is admitting that the entertainment and/or atmosphere is subpar. If it's a store, the owner is admitting that his or her products aren't capable of selling on their own merits.

LL should work an anti-camper/bot rule into the traffic algorithm. If an AV stays in a location over x amount of time (that time limit NOT being revealed) then the AV's presence should be ignored in the traffic calculation.

As far as picks camping...if I land on a property that offers to buy my picks....I leave. Plain and simple. My picks are more valuable than to be sold.

Newsflash, for those who think paying for Picks is so outrageous...RL businesses do the same thing! Myspace has ads on the pages, to cover the cost of its free service. Many businesses offer discounts or other specials for referring friends. Businesses trade website links, raising their Google ranking. Ever heard of a Google bomb? It's exactly the same as Picks.

Viral marketing is big among businesses, too. Some companies have employees who post on message boards, promoting a new movie or product by giving it positive reviews using multiple sockpuppets. Others send attractive women into popular clubs to flirt and hand out ads or samples.

Good products do not necessarily sell well. I know many great creators in SL who barely sell anything, while others with mediocre products sell a lot. This is also true in RL (hello, Wal-mart, hello Britney Spears). Price is a factor, but what really makes the difference is knowing how to sell - and being willing to do whatever it takes to get those sales. Creating the illusion of popularity often leads to an item becoming popular, because people will want what they think everyone else thinks is cool.

Everyone has a boundary of what they will and won't do in terms of getting sales. I personally don't use traffic bots or camping to boost my land, because I don't want to reward avatars that aren't real people. Bots and campers aren't going to buy my products. Bots and campers also harm other users of SL by causing lag and stress on the grid. Picks harm my competition, by boosting my ranking ahead of theirs, but they don't mean that my products are inferior. In fact, I provide excellent customer service. Picks paying is more ethical than some of the RL advertising methods I described, because I'm not hiding the fact that I pay people. I look at Picks as a way of helping newbies (see my earlier post), one that also benefits my business. Everybody wins!

So basically if i say "where do i go to find a place that is generally accepted as good, offering good entertainment/good products"
You tells me "You won't because we bribe peoples to vote for us" ?

I'm not interested to know who can shell the most money for advertisement. I only wanna know i'm going to a cool place.

It doesn't work that way RL, why on earth do you think it will work that way SL? There are quality content creators whose items won't find a wide audience, it's not a matter of build it and they will come, it's a big old world here. Places and items need to be promoted. Take a cursory glance at the price people pay for the top classifieds. Are they the best products here?



If you refer a friend to Second Life and they sign up for premium membership you can earn L$2,000.

That's the whole thing in a nutshell.
SL is a social platform for the majority of users. An expanding SL will be that even more so.
"Where are the people?" is the classic noob question. "Where are the coo places?"

LL needs to attract and retain users.
Businesses in SL need SL to attract and retain users. They need SL to grow more users.

Gaming the internal systems that are intended to direct users to the cool places/things works against those aims. The gaming is done out of self-interest regardless of the effect on SL or others.


Gaming search is dishonest and destructive self-centred behaviour.
"It's not against the TOS" / "It's normal" / "It's business" / "It's reality" do not magically make gaming honest and ethical.

The top classified are clearly paid-for advertising. Nobody expects the most heavily advertised product/places to be the best.





Are you saying that if you consider the LL's referral bonus is dishonest then is therefore not dishonest to game the LL Search engine?

How do you know that? If someone can afford those prices then it suggests they sell a hell of a lot of content which should mean the content is good. However my point is that a new content creator can't just make content and expect it to sell. There's more to it than that.




No I'm saying if people are so outraged at paid referrals and artificially inflated traffic that they walk away, what are they doing here when Linden Lab engage in both practices? I'd hazard a guess that it boils down to people not being that bothered if they like the product.

Of course there is. The question is - should "more" include acting dishonenstly?




I believe that it boils down to SL being the only game in town currently.