Feedback on Ad Farm Post - Part 2

No, the real problem has nothing to do with advertising, parasitic or not.

So by your definition then all the ads in NYC Times Square are parasitic ads? How silly! Now lets get to the point already....

In RL advert costs are based on visibility and / or subscriber base. An advert costs more in a mag with a circulation of 45,000 as opposed to that which has one of 40. A sign in Times Square costs more than a sign in the middle of a farm with no visibility

SL should be a free marketplace. It is a great way for people to learn how to do business and try business models out without too much damage if they fail.

It's very clear that if an ad tower angers people or it's placed in the middle of someone's property, effective advertising is not the purpose of the build.

No, the real problem has nothing to do with advertising, parasitic or not.

The real problem is that a fairly small group of people discovered that they could add value to land by erecting ugly and annoying builds that residents who put time, money, and effort into their own plots would pay good money to remove. The blight that they create isn't a side effect of poor advertising policies, it's the whole point. The blight that they create isn't a result of unregulated advertising running rampant, the ads that they put up are nothing more than a cover.

Their ads don't attract business. That's because they're not designed to do that. They're designed to be ugly, repugnant, and annoying, and they're commonly placed in locations with little or no traffic other than the nearby land owning residents. They're often positioned in such a way that there could be no conceivable advertising benefit from their presence. These people are not advertisers, they're blight farmers involved in aesthetic extortion.

In fact, there's no reason that this aesthetic extortion has to be tied to advertising at all. This week, blight farmers are using intentionally ugly "advertisements" to shake down other residents. Next week, they could be amusement game operators with garish and ugly gaming machines that serve the same purpose, or artists who put up hideous prim anti-masterpieces, or activists drawing attention to good causes with builds that make everybody's eyes bleed. They'll go into business as vendors with hideous stores and stalls. Squeeze the advertising business and legitimate advertisers will suffer while the blight farmers ooze away and find new ways to shake down residents, and it'll be necessary to squeeze other sectors of the Second Life economy.

Which brings me back to the point that I was leading up to when you said that I got "distracted" -- go after microparcel advertising, and the blight farmers will move to microparcel vending. And outlawing 16 sq. meter microparcels won't work either, as there's nothing special about 16 sq. meter plots except that they're the smallest and most inexpensive out there. Eliminate them, and the blight farmers will just cut up plots into 64 sq. meter parcels instead, with a slightly smaller profit margin. Eliminate the 64 sq. meter plots, and then they'll move to the next smallest. In time, a level would be reached beyond which extortion would be economically unfeasible, but a lot of innocent residents would suffer, and probably leave SL, in the process.

This week, the blight farming extortionists have turned lots of people against advertisers and microparcels. Next week, it may be not-quite-microparcels and vending stalls or gaming machines. The week after that, it could be small satellite stores, or outdoor art, or whatever. Each time, the story will be the same -- divide and conquer, turn residents against legitimate pursuits, and then slip away to find a new extortion angle.

On the other hand, the sources of many residents' complaints will dry up if the extortionists are targeted. Edge cuts, donut holes, and other slice'n'dice schemes? Without residents adding value to these parcels via extortion, much of the economic incentive to cut up land in this fashion will vanish, so it won't happen nearly as often. Ridiculous levels of ugly ad blight? Like I said, they're not really ads, they're extortion tools, so they'll vanish as the extortionists find it increasingly difficult to do business.

A discussion about advertising more generally or the impact of the industry on Second Life is certainly valuable, but let's not kid ourselves as to the nature of the problem here: extortion is the issue, not advertising. I suspect that Jack's aware of this, which is why he's taking the approach that he is, but saying more would probably only help the blight farmers. We'll see how things go after October 1st.

Sorry for veering into tl;dr territory, and thanks for your time if you got this far,
Liandra

TO JACK LINDEN:

I don't think you are going to correct how many sims have been ruined by micro parcel cutting or signs in the past. Proof shows on property sale searches that the majority of these type sims get values trashed. Look at the low L$ per meter figures. Almost all of the time the NinjaLand and Super Freak Ninja bots are purchasing parcels in heavily trashed sims for L$3 to L$3.5. BELOW what Linden even starts land auctions at. The cheap parcels always for sale are in heavily micro'd sims. Many people as you know have abandoned lots surrounding micro grids. Seasoned people know to stay away from purchasing land near any micro parcels. But there are many novice people just starting and they sadly don't know how to make a proper "land investment". Some stay on and lick their wounds, while others just leave, left with an image of SL being a silly game.

Have you ever noticed the lack of the common networked signs in real traffic sims?

I understand the logic of having a sign in every sim assures some sort of visibility. But without knowing the demographic of who is looking at your sign it becomes faulted as well.

SL should be a free marketplace. It is a great way for people to learn how to do business and try business models out without too much damage if they fail.

Yes.. It's also very clear that LL knows this and have declared that they don't want to see it any more.

The quote at http://nwn.blogs.com/nwn/2008/09/more-from-jack.html really sums it up. Hope you don't mind me quoting from your office hour, Jack!!

This isn't just another bit in the ToS or a blog post that LL may or may not enforce consistantly. This is LL saying they're sick of this kind of BS and are gonna start smacking heads around.

I really, really very, very much hope so.

But why does nobody seem to believe them?

I really, really very, very much hope so.

But why does nobody seem to believe them?

A discussion about advertising more generally or the impact of the industry on Second Life is certainly valuable, but let's not kid ourselves as to the nature of the problem here: extortion is the issue, not advertising. I suspect that Jack's aware of this, which is why he's taking the approach that he is, but saying more would probably only help the blight farmers. We'll see how things go after October 1st.

...But why does nobody seem to believe them?

Because history is not necessarily on their side, and people seem to find ways around rules, particularly when they are not continually enforced.

I'm gonna keep my fingers crossed.

Because they seem to be forgetting one very important fact. Linden Lab is under NEW management.

Thanks that helped a bit

btw How do I get one of the smileys to appear in the text they don't for me?

Leave out the dash []

Because they seem to be forgetting one very important fact. Linden Lab is under NEW management.

Simply put up a page on the website to vote Yes or No to allowing outdoor advertising in your region. They have the amount of land you own recorded, and they can add up all land for which the owners vote "yes" or "no" on, and if the majority want external/outdoor advertising, then it will be allowed. If the majority DON'T want it, then it will be forbidden, and any existing instances will need to be removed immediately. I also would suggest that it be checked only periodically, to avoid "floundering". Like, say, every 3 months..

Anybody who owns at least 1/2 of a mainland region gets to say what happens there?

With regards to this form of advertising, sure.

I also didn't say "half", I said "majority". If LL decides that it needs to be 2/3 or 3/4, fine. Point is, it becomes an "opt-out" list.

edit: and, speaking of Bay City, which is mainland though has slightly different rules than mainland.. All the ad farm stuff applies there as well, right? Just checking..

Wouldn't it be easier to just say adverts must be kept to roadsides?
They seem like the best place to put an advert

It is mainland -- but sometimes, someofthe mainland rules get forgotten there. :-/

It is mainland -- but sometimes, someofthe mainland rules get forgotten there. :-/

Well.. Yeah.. Except that I like roaming the roads and I'm not really interested in seeing ads when I'm out roaming. People keep saying it's the best place for them but I see it as just about the worst possible choice.

SL is not RL. The roads are not full of traffic.

Wouldn't it be easier to just say adverts must be kept to roadsides?

They seem like the best place to put an advert

What if people don't vote for some reason? Which is likely.
Apathy is quite common.
How many people ignore the questions when they login to SL?

Hit hard on 1st October and keep with their intentions.