Feedback on Ad Farm Post - Part 2

As far as I can see, nothing. This is the franchised advertising I have referred to. I guess the extent will depend on how the costs work out. This seems to be the inevitable consequence of tying restrictions to land ownership instead of advertisement source.

Seems to me, this latest policy allows extortion on up to 50 plots per avatar.

They won't advertise from the best visibility. They'll just find 50 of most annoying places to set up. No point in using roadside billboards that nobody looks at when you can be in someone's face.

I think it's totally ironic, that adcutters whine about being blocked, when they are the ones doing the blocking.

Advertising is not viable. I don't care what any of the phony ad people say. If it was, we'd be doing it, but it isn't...so we don't. The only profit is from people buying back the view.

It's just a big guise for extortion and price gouging, with a whole lot of griefing attached.

Both are RL felonies.

Because of the sheer numbers involved (and the use of alts) it is impossible to poll literally everyone. You get responses from a representative sample and extrapolate. I think we can agree what a person posts in blogs/forums is what their opinion is. In this forum and the one before it every poster (except for the adfarmers) who did not remain neutral (mostly Lindens, and proportionally that was a small number) wanted them gone.

As to not interviewing you ... it was stated 'except for the adfarmers'.



Untrue, I have refused to do further business with blogging sites that displayed ads on my blog that I had for years. Both my partner and I stopped buying products we loved when we received unsolicited spam from them (no, they did not have our contact information).

Yeah, and it's not difficult to work out. Ignoring return on the initial cost of the land, an annual Premium, net of the current L$300/wk stipend, costs about L$3500 for the year and can group-own thirty-five 16sq.m. microparcels, so it works out to under L$2/wk per microparcel ad location.

Assuming there's any advertising revenue at all, that cost should be negligible, so that will drive up the value of the microparcels, dicing the Mainland further.

I, too, can't see how LL can detect this happening, at least not without looking inside the scripts driving the ads... and even then, the right architecture could make the practice arbitrarily difficult to detect. This would surely have a detrimental impact on the Mainland, but how one could go about deciding who was doing this to violate the intent of the policy and who was just another advertiser?

Agreed. Although personally I'd like the option to turn banlines on and off in the viewer I support their use.

As to explorers, I wouldn't want you climbing over the roof of my house, sliding down the drainpipe, going through my back garden and climbing over my back fence in RL, so why do you think it should be allowed in SL?

The whole 50 plots limit allowed stinks. It's serious back pedalling and I wish Jack would explain this back pedalling. The ad farmers are over the moon about it. This is not a stricter policy than the licensing idea in any way, shape or form.

Of course they'll look to rent plots from other groups for their so called adverts.

QFT

Like the 'Price Roux trust' perhaps? Look who the founder is and suddenly plots changed to it last night. From where I am I can spy at least three microplots/adplots owned by members of that group or the group itself.

I am guessing they are beyond their 50.

The big red for sale signs will just become nice small 8m high for sale signs ground based.
There will be more than 1 of them per sim just the way there is now, on plots that are 512sqm or larger.

There will not be 32 little red for sale signs on a cut up 512 parcel owned by one user because they will only be allowed one sign per sim in those situations.

There is no clarification from Jack specifically in the ruling as he doesn't want to allow certain individuals a framework to work around.

I think this is the way Jack expects it to be.

Jack can you tell me if I am right please?

well, i take 20 scattered 16's and merge them into a single noncontiguous parcel...
so i can imagine adframers doing the same and marking that larger plot for the traditional $1000/m price.

and explore empty thin air... good plan... why dont people who dont like ad farms fly over em...

do you use ban lines kathy ? if so ever think how they look to your neighbours ?? any better than ad farms??

What so much of this reminds me of is the old practice of "spite fences" (and "spite houses" that I was reading about again today

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spite_fence

Those have been largely banned in the real world for decades, and I imagine the same arguments came up then that are coming up now.



It's an interesting point... particularly in a world where people teleport to get around. There's a chunk of train track and such I tend to frequent *just* to see how bad the ad farming is. I've mentioned Crumbi before, which is in the middle of it. Thing is, there's all these ads, but no-one riding the rails (SLRR has been down for months now) and not a lot of "green dots" in that area.

on the basis of your earlier post I went and had a look at crumbi..I dont know if I found the junction you meant Marianne but in the area I looked at I actually thought the ads inoffensive and fitted in with the surrounding environs.

Agree with you its a shame the trains don't seem to run....

The whole banline thing is just not germane to the advertising policy. I mean, it would be, if the whole point of controlling ad blight were to make it better for exploring, but that's just not the case.

(As it happens, I never intentionally use banlines on my land and happen to think that a good 90% of the banlines in-world are there by mistake, and that if the people who are using them understood what their effect actually is, they'd do something else. But that's just my opinion, completely unrelated to what I think about advertising.)

So, it may be fine to take up a crusade for getting rid of banlines, but that's totally orthogonal to advertising.

(Granted, it's not entirely irrelevant to microparcel extortion, unfortunately, but that's a whole different thing, too. Whatever one thinks of the general topic of whitelist access restrictions, they make no sense on land of any size that's for sale, or those special 16sq.m. "knitting" parcels. )

Its entirely related.... I want to know how many people who are complaining about ad farms actively utilise ban lines which has Ive said are as unsightly and pestilential as an ad boarding. I wonder how many people want an end to something that they may see as a nuisance while wanting to preserve a nuisance they themselves initiate.

And I know many people are sick of ban lines.

Jack

I really worry about this, I also think it may turn out to be worse than weedy says in some ways.

50 adverts allowed but enforced to be of reasonable size and conforming with surroundings sounds very good, but if placed in a poor position these will cause problems and be of no use for the intended purpose.

Another user is already asking about whether they can be blocked by walls or not.
Then about the ramifications of preventing for sale signs by land sellers, add these two questions together and it soon becomes clear that there is a clear lack of intent to get into the spirit of your proposal by certain people.

Not lowering the level of small plots that can be held without prior consent allows these people to have 50 adverts and many more unused locations.
I feel that reasonable groups such as weedy's should be given special allowance to hold the plots they require to operate, but all other users should be limited to the 50 plots they could use for advertising, slx boxes etc.

I know you did tackle it by saying where transaction histories show a predominant motive to increase land value through using signage, etc. This doesn't seem to have filled many people with the hope and trust they will see real change though.

I to am very concerned not by advertising which I really don't think is the main problem. but by the clear intent of some people to carry on making problems for all other users.
Using the small plots that we all know they hold thousands of.

There should be some insistence on small plot owners to level their ground to the surrounding level to, as this causes just as much disturbance as any of these new 8m adverts will.

Finally

I also think the level would be better if limited to 35plots/adverts as this means any new premium account user instantly has the ability to hold the same number of plots as all other users making a fairer situation for all.
I think these levels should be limited to user still not premium accounts, this removes the option to have multiple premium accounts holding small plots aswell.

I stated earlier to Drongle how many people hold many small plots, I think this is very few members, how many can be proven to be using them for genuine reasons, I know of Weedy and the Land machine people only myself who could both be given allowance to hold theirs, Then any others impacted would only be the very troublesome adfarmers we wish to stop

I was referring to the view looking North East at http://slurl.com/secondlife/Crumbi/125/218/80



(Which has actually gained a new ad tower since this was taken last week)

apples and oranges.... sure banlines are annoying to many and should be looked into, however one thing at a time and it's ad's time now. A few things also annoy me about SL but isnt tied to ads so it's not their time.

Land for sale signs, according to Jack's post, are covered under this policy the same as ads, 1 per sim per person/group.

I have no ban lines or security systems in place on my land. That doesn't mean I don't support their use. And, at 55 - 60 meters above ground level, with your draw distance at, say, 128 meters, you can see plenty besides empty thin air.

But, as others have stated, this has nothing whatever to do with the discussion at hand so that's all I will say about it.

So forgive me for asking, but isnt this not only equally an attempt to harass, but also poor business practices? Wasting your 50 lot cap on being pig headed where others have openly shown you are not wanted, instead of moving to more welcome areas that would receive more traffic & generate revenue. More clicks for your Linden instead of zero clicks for the satisfaction of being plain stubborn (and mean, imho).

Not to mention putting your business(es) in a bad light by openly stating your reasons for not selling those lots. If a business in my town used such tactics against their community, those who were aware of it would never give them their money and rightfully so. Companies like that generally end up closing or moving.

Business 101 teaches you that. If you really want to bring in customers and generate positive, (not to mention FREE) publicity you would offer those lots to the neighbors at a small fee. You look like the good guy & generous businessman. There is no better advertising than that.


i am very new to Sl, but eager to learn about this incredible community. So i read the forums as it seems to be where everyone comes together to communicate about issues and happenings.

i dont own land (I hope to soon, though!) yet but my sister does and i have heard her talk about ad problems. So i have been keeping up with these 2 threads and see the same comments over and over by each side.


To people on the outside looking in, advertisers are looking bad to everyone and i see why now. It looks like it comes down to lack of respect by the advertisers to work with neighbours (in an effort to make $$) and alot of 'i can do it because TOS says so/there is no covenant'.

So like in RL when a community has had enough, they rise up and fight back. Who is right? The ones just wanting peace and quiet or the ones demanding its their right to come in and put ads where clearly the already existing residents do not want them?

i guess this has been going on for a long time which is sad. Money makes people do very unethical things.

i think if you move to an ad filled location that's one thing. But this business of advertisers coming in and throwing up signs that obviously disrupt the harmony and aesthetics of the area is bullying of the worst kind. Big business vs the little people. The people who spend a great deal of their SL time on their land vs the ad person who is there just long enough to place his ads.

i wish you and the others a clearer mind in the future so that you can build a more harmonious relationship with the residents of SL. There is enough hate & bullying in RL why drag it into SL too.

good luck to you all. i hope it can all be worked out.

Sorry my first forum post is so long.

I love the terms for the Ad Farms but have 1 question based on a statement.

"In addition to the cap, we will allow no more than 1 advertising placement by an individual in any single region. "

I Understand this but my quesiton is; does this mean only 1 ad per single region per advertiser or 1 ad per region period. I ask this because if we have a hundred advertisers and each can put 1 ad per region this would mean 100 advertisement boards per region. Please clarify.

Maybe this was exponded on in one of the pervious posts and sorry if I am repeating this question. Just point me to the right post.

As Ive said banlines are far more an irritant than ads are. Naturally some people wont want the subject to be brought under the spotlight but if I can get a seperate thread initiated thats fine - although this section is the mainland discussion and I see my comments as totally relevant to the discussion.

It is 1 ad per advertiser per region. So, if you have 100 advertisers, you can have 100 ads in a region. Yeah, this is going to work out well *rolls eyes*

Jack this is bad if so, as any land seller puts out signs to clearly identify their plots.
Yes the big red ones are ugly and a nuisance, but most are ground based and often with the amount of land on the market it is common to see 10 or more from one land seller in a sim.

I thought this was about managing the mainland and preventing hideous advertising coupled to extortion.

Advertising of any sort should be ground based no larger than 8m and any stand alone advertising limited to one per sim on plots below 512sqm in my opinion.
A sensible well designed for sale notice is just not practical to be limited to one per sim, as how will many new users know the land is even for sale.