where can I find pick camping places ?

I've ignored the "Sling thinks she's the new Messiah" nonsense up to now.
It's just an attempt to demonise the messenger.

But I'll bite.

Everything you say can be said right back to you , or Phil or whoever.
Pot meet kettle.

If I say "Pick buying is dishonest and unethical" , you say it's me RPing being God and defining morality for everyone.
If Phil says "There is nothing dishonest or unethical about pick buying", you say that is simply Phil offering his humble opinion.

Or
"There is nothing dishonest about doing things to improve search rankings. How many times does it need to be repeated before you grasp it?"
This is Phil strongly asserting that his statements are the absolute truth.

Even as an opinion that one is completely faulty. He is saying that there is nothing that can be done to improve search rankings that is dishonest.
People would wonder in that case why search engines tru to prevent people from gaming the rankings.






Please try to understand that not everyone will agree with you.

In your opinion Sling, this is the part you constantly miss. There are plenty of people who think Google are wrong about paid links, others argue that Google are against paid links because they themselves sell links, it's really not a black and white issue. Google concede that paid links are a normal business activity.

The point is whether paid picks lead to users not finding products, have you got any examples of where this is the case? Are people not finding links to items they're looking for because of paid picks? That's the crux of the issue. The Google search appliance was introduced to help people find items more easily, they needed a ranking factor and chose picks. They told business owners that picks are important, this means business owners were going to sell their picks in one way or another. That's how business works.

Linden Lab have also said they may change the way search works, they could change the algorithm to something else. There's far more to search than picks, you also need to know what keywords to use, it's not just a case of generate picks and they will come and for your products to sell they need to appeal to the user and that is the bottom line.

Weak argument. They did tell everyone that picks are needed to get the best search results, period. They never said people need 16m2 parcels, period. No matter on how hard you try to compare everything you can think of with add farming, it does not work.

Once more I will try:
Paying for picks is completely accepted by LL. They may in the future decide different, but for now they do not mind. At least, that is all we can conclude so far, if I did not miss a post.

You think it is unethical. Your very good right. You bring it as the absolute truth. Not your good right. It is not the opinion I am fighting, it is the way you bring it. Words like dishonest, unethical and immoral are very easily used. It is the best way to make people look bad without using any real argument.

As far as I know, I made the first compare with a preacher, not Phil, but I could be wrong. And not without a reason. You are acting exactly the same, as a street preacher we had years ago in the city I grew up. he too was very easy with using words like immoral, unethical end dishonest. His blind belief made him stupid because he did not even consider arguments that were against his blind belief.

The difference between you and him is that your posts seem not based on a religion, but for the rest your way of discussing is much alike.

Now I am not able to speak for Phil, Ciaran, Rha, whoever, but from my point of view I think I always make clear that it is just my opinion. And apparently more people then just me think you write your words down like it is the holy bible. That alone should make you think. If just me were to say it, you could shrug. If a more people say it, they might have a valid point. So far you ignored it, in your last post you "bite", but I would advise you to think it over.

Again, it is not your opinion I have a problem with. A world where everyone agrees with me would be nice, but not something I expect to happen. But neither you nor me can decide for the whole of SL what is right and what is wrong. We can decide what we THINK is right or wrong.

Finally, the word demonising is quite funny from your mouth. The last half year in every topic you could even slihtly connect to traffic bots, camping or bot running, you "demonized" people with words like: unethical people, scammers, liars, dishonest people. So I really cannot grasp how you dare to say you are the one demonised here. I do not know how things are in your world, but in mine people who are compared with liars, thieves and scammers, are more "demonised" then people being compared to street preachers.

No. The crux of the issue is the ranking.

Search is going to find the relevant parcels anyway due to keywords in the content.
People don't need to have Picks pointing to them in order to be found.
However, Picks are used in ranking.

That's what Picks buying is all about - improving the ranking.
This is in no way a subjective thing. It's the way that the appliance works.


Phil bangs on about how the paid picks actually improve search. That's nonsense. Search would still find the products without those picks,

People buy picks not to ensure that their products will be listed in search, but to try and ensure that their own parcels are ranked higher.
That's it. End of story.



Your humbug about not finding products due to paid picks is just plain ridiculous.

Once more you fail:
To take a leaf from the book of 'the other side' - what makes you believe that "Paying for picks is completely accepted by LL"?

Are you saying that because LL have not banned the practice?
In that case you are arguing that LL completely accept every abuse of the system that exists and ever existed before they took action against it.
I believe that such would be to stretch the meaning of "completely accept" or even "accept".







Read post #176 above

Pot kettle black

There are umpteen ways to optimise your parcel, you're talking nonsense now. There has to be ranking.



Only if people use the right keywords to optimise their parcel. Picks are irrelevant if someone hasn't got the right keywords.



You simply don't understand how search engines work. It's not plain ridiculous at all, that's what a search engine does, it returns results. That is the key factor of a search engine. If a search engine is returning relevant results, it is working as intended.

Of course people sell picks to try and assist their ranking, picks are a ranking factor. People also put signs up asking people to put their picks in their profile and not paying for them, but it still amounts to selling picks. Others just hope someone will like their parcel enough to place a pick. They also hope the people placing the pick will count in pick rankings.

There are many factors involved, however the important point of any search engine is to return relevant results. Search engines can't return results based on which product is of the highest quality, even if it were user ranked that wouldn't be the case.

Well OF COURSE there has to be ranking.
There has to be some way of deciding the order in which order the hits are presented.

That's why I wrote "The crux of the issue is the ranking."
That's what all this discussion is centred on.

My position is that the generation of Paid picks simply to increase ranking is a nonsense that does not in any way deliver a benefit to the user of search.
Rather the buying of picks demeans the meaning of picks within a persons profile.

There is no difference in principle and intent between buying picks and running traffic bots. Both are done purely to increase ranking, woth no benefit to anyone but the parcel owner.
It's done purely for the benefit of the parcel owner and for nobody else. In the process, society in SL is negatively impacted.


You want to give money to noobs? Just give them the money.

Well OF COURSE search engines can not rank on "quality". The nearest they can come to that is on some form of user votes, provided that those votes are not commodities bought by the subject owners.

Search engines will return relevant results without the need to use Picks as a ranking factor.

I heard picks dont count toward search if the person with the pick is not a premium member. Is that true? Are all the NPI noobs who are selling their picks getting paid for nothing?

honey where have you seen me trying to push my view point on anyone?
I have yet to even express my views on the morality or the ethics of picks camping, etc

I merely stated facts, which can be backed up, which are that picks camping is not against the TOS

so... sorry, there is no pot kettle black here...
and sorry again, my comments are not opinions, mine are facts, nothing more...

try to understand that folks are not going to always agree with your way of thinking, and because you keep trying to shove it down their throat, it just pisses them off (and most likely folks who are reading along)

or... do you like pissing folks off ?

oh. no I am not saying your opinion is you playing god and someone else's is them just stating an opinion....
it is the way you say it

they state that it is their opinion... their belief

you state that it is the truth, that it is how it is, regardless of what others think

therein lies the difference

IF you said..

ok my opinion is that picks camping is unethical and immoral and wrong....

and left it at that...

no one would have a problem...

however you do not stop there, you go on to say that those who use it are bad, evil, cheaters, wrong doers, etc, and it doesn't matter what others think, because that is how it is!

(That is where the problem is, no one likes to be told they are bad people, or dishonest or evil, or etc... yet. your posts say exactly that about those who use picks camping devices)

understand?



in "your" opinion it is completely faulty... that doesn't mean others will see fault in it, heck I am sure there are others who completely agree with Phil and totally disagree with your opinions.... and in those cases you will step up and say that they are wrong too... (which is in it's self wrong to do, because an opinion is neither right nor wrong... it is an OPINION!

Can you even read Sling? You are making yourself more unbelievable every posting.
What I sad is that they told us that picks are important to search, they know there is being payed for search, and they did not speak against it. So yes they accept it.



Okay this proves you do not read a thing that does not suit you do once more I am done with you. Should have known better. No use trying to discuss with someone that does not listen to a word that does not fit her view.

Payment info on file/used is needed. Well, not entirely true, the avatar needs to have a web page, and PIOF avatars have that. NPIOF avatars seldom. I recall something about founding a group to get your web page up, but most pick systems just check the payment info as far as I know. Mine does for sure.

Yes, if you start up a group, you will get a web page.

Hilarious!

Of course no one likes to be told they are bad people, or dishonest or evil, or etc...

Of course my posts say that search gaming is dishonest and unethical.
There are not many ways of describing a behaviour as dishonest and unethical without using those sorts of words.

These forums are full of opinions. What percentage of opinions would you say are preceded with the phrase "In my opinion" ? Not many I would say.


I'm saying that search gaming is dishonest and unethical.
I explain exactly why I believe that. I don't simply make the statement.
If the gamers react badly to that , then tough!


Perhaps you think that I should somehow reason with the likes of Phil in the hopes of persuading them to see the downside of the systematic abuse of search ranking criteria?
If you think that then you haven't paid much attention to the manner in which he puts his case in the many threads on this topic.

what I think doesn't matter but since you are making assumptions...

I think you should just let this whole thing drop (and the others let it drop too)

you made your point as did they
some will not agree with you, accept it and move on

some won't give a rats ass what you think
accept it and move on

some will agree
embrace it and move on

...

moves on

I'm perfectly happy to move on.

However, if any gamers get in front of my face, I'm going to rattle the bars on their cage, poke their sorry dinosaur butts with a pointy stick, etc.

No that is what your discussion is centred on. My discussion is centred on a search engine producing relevant results. As Jeska said at the future of traffic meetings, if you search for "Bling stripper heels" then search should return results for "Bling stripper heels". That in a nutshell is what search should do.



The generation of paid picks is only a nonsense if the results become irrelevant due to paid picks. That's the central issue, that's the important issue. For example if you search for "Bling stripper heels" and the results aren't for "Bling stripper heels" because of paid picks, then paid picks are detrimental to search.



Business owner tries to boost own business shocker! The intent of picks, keywords, traffic, classifieds, products, freebies, money trees, money orbs, raffles, competitions, special offers, sales, lucky chairs, camping, advertising on websites, via the forums, via blogs is all intended to increase returns for a business owner.



I do.

Of course this is why in this thread, as well as in several others, Sling decided to start the "picks is evil" or "bots are evil" thing. She is getting more hilarious every post

You forget: optimizing parcel description is evil, because it is solely done to get higher in search. Optimizing your search results is evil, as it is only done to to get higher in search. We should call our parcel some simple name, create stuff, and sit back. That is way fairer, as some of the competition does that as well. And gaining an advantage by optimizing for search, whether it is paying for picks or changing parcel description, must be evil, not?

Increasing returns probably is even more evil

If your discussion is not related to pick camping, then it's deffo in the wrong thread.
My discussion belongs here in that someone wanted to find pick camping places, and I dropped in to highlight the downside of picks camping.
The rest is long.


The use of paid picks to influence ranking is a nonsense.
If you search for "Bling stripper heels" you'll get results for "Bling stripper heels". You'll get them without the need for Picks.
Why should paid picks increase the ranking of a parcel? If parcel owners want to pay for greater visibility, let them use classified / paid listings.
That the increased ranking of 'normal' results is accounted for by parcel owner spend is hidden from the user. This is dishonest.





'Not all methods of achieving a goal are ethical' shocker!
They are indeed all intended to increase returns for a business owner.
However, some of them do so by dishonestly gaming the search engine.

Businesses would be well advised to try and increase returns. That's nothing unusual or shocking. That does not mean that any and all methods of doing that are ethical.

Marcel!

What's happened to you? You've gone stark staring bonkers??

While it might be your opinion that "optimizing parcel description is evil", I really have to take issue with it.

Sorry but no, the increased classified increases visibility, gets more people to the store who then use picks as a direct increase from increased visibility. This is hidden still in the form of picks because we don't know what got people to the store to place the pick in the first place. We all have 10 picks each, stores really aren't in general draw dropping you must visit places.

Your narrow focus on paid picks ignores the umpteen other ways people get to parcels and more importantly you haven't made one decent point as to how paid picks damage search. Search engines return results. Search and how search performs are the important issue, if you want to guarantee high visibility you pay for a high priced classified.



Indeed, you just happen to be picking a subject area that there is much debate on. Not everyone agrees that paid links aren't relevant, not in SL, not on the internet. An example of a business practice that is unethical is falsely advertising services on your parcel to attract customers, that's an easily defined misuse of search that is detrimental to search.

Is that what you call your ramblings? Rattling bars? A pointy stick? Good grief, Sling. Does anytone here look as if they've been stuck with a pointy stick, or shaken by the sound of rattling bars? Your arguments are being shown up right, left and center, and yet you think you're rattling bars and wielding a pointy stick. Does any part of reality ever enter your brain?

Btw, it was interesting to see that you now think you are just a messenger. Who sent you? LMAO. Marcel was correct that I didn't make any mention of a preacher, and that you are beginning to sound like one. You have thoughts in your head that, presumably, were given to you by someone else, and it is your job as the messenger to pass them on. Either that or you accept them as your own thoughts, and that another side of you (the messenger) has to pass them on, because they are infallible truths - hmmm. Well well well. Either way, it's quite a turn up.

how the hell is that dishonest?

do you know the advertising costs for places in RL? I bet not.

I don't think that everyone has a right to know what my advertising budget is, or what I pay for other means of advertising, other than the ones that LL chooses to make transparent

hell, next thing you know, you will be saying it is dishonest to pay someone to advertise my place on their website or their place, without disclosing how much I am paying them to advertise for me


jesus wake up girl!

paid picks is no different than any other form of advertising

person a owns a store, person b has a means of helping advertise that store... (picks)
so person a offers to pay person b to advertise person a's store..

is that wrong????

or maybe it should be... person b charges person a to place an ad in person b's pick
(which is the same damn thing)

your argument doesn't hold water and you know it, you are now totally grasping at straws

I kept my opinion out of it, because it is just an opinion, but I decided why the hell not state my opinion (it was probably obvious anyway)

Paid picks in my opinion is not dishonest, immoral, or any of those.. it is just another means of advertising, and if I could afford to have a picks camp system I would (I looked into it, can't afford it at this time)
If I knew how to do all the little things to help bring my store up in the search results you bet your ass I would do them, as long as they are not breaking the TOS.
This is business honey, big business for some folks, and when it comes to business, people will do what they can to get themselves out there, and known.

(If LL did not want folks to be charging for picks placement, they would simply remove the picks from the search engine results)

at least that is what one would assume...

I wasn't going to say anything... but.. I just could not resist


THIS says it all, you are only wanting folks to say something so you can .... "rattle the bars on their cage, poke their sorry, dinosaur butts with a pointy stick, etc."

you LOVE the back and forth of this, you THINK you are poking people and pissing them off...

I don't see anyone getting upset though (except maybe you, not sure though as I do not know you well enough to gauge that)

*shrug*
you know you won't walk away (no more than I will at this point LOL)