BOT places! List them here!

I am not sure I really follow this.

If they were so busy why roll out a new search at all?

If there had to be a new search then why would it receive such little attention.

Duh!
Are you under the impression that when someone does a search in SL, the parcels that used picks camping are clearly separated out from the parcels listed purely on relevancy?

It sounds like you must be under that impression, as otherwise your question is ludicrous.

Quoting your post, but answering you and Qie the same time.

They were, and are busy, and I think Qie is right, they did not think it over as much as we think they did. Wether the HTML pages already existed or not, I do not know, but Google technique is not new. Create html pages of all you want to crawl (if not already there), and google does the rest. Probably they did not have to invent much. Each link will become an inbound link for the place it links to, thats all.

To be honest, I do not think the "using picks on bots" is the reason they do not create html pages for NPIOF accounts, but that one we will never know for sure. The reason I do not think it is the case, is because I do not think they mind who or what has picks in the profile, as long as the engine keeps running.

LL is neither pro-Picks-paying not against-Picks-paying , I bet. As Qie already stated, they are probably always under pressure, implementing a new feature, and repairing another one.

SL is a platform that does not have the current userbase as a target, in my opinion. We are simply beta testers for a system with a much bigger aim. So no matter how important we think we are, probably we are the only ones thinking that

@Sling: Maybe you do not understand the meaning of: We are done discussing?

Hmm... it was lost on me. I misread it earlier. I'd understood that he isn't emplyed in an RL job, but works freelance in RL. My mistake.

I comprehend what you are saying, but I have no sympathetic awareness of it.
Tough!

1. I only insulted those who insulted me first. Since a number of people have enjoyed insulting me, I have probably written more insults than any other individual, but if you count the number of insults that have been aimed at me in the thread, and the number that I've written in the thread, you'll see a different picture. But isn't it odd how you only seem to see the insults that *I* throw. Blinkered? Coincidence? I'm the one who is rude because I retaliate. Odd, isn't it.

2. I didn't make any comment about the quality of Chip's work - only about him wishing to make more from SL, whilst having to work in RL. I'd misunderstood what he wrote, I was corrected on it, and I said I was mistaken.

3. yes. people have put forth all sort of rubbish in this thread (and others) in order to paint false pictures of me. And they call *me* a liar lol

I spoke once, and I have it in writing that traffic bots are "not against the current ToS".

Stating that a particular business practice is unethical is not an insult, Phil. It's a statement of fact. If you don't like how that correlates into a statement about your character you might want to stop engaging in the unethical practice, or you can just keep calling people names and demeaning the intelligence of anyone who disagrees with you. *shrug*

One thing I'm curious about. Both you and Marcel claim that you don't need the money from SL. If that's the case, why be so cutthroat about it? To me that makes your behavior all the more obnoxious. What if someone you're cheating out of a better search listing really does need the money but wouldn't stoop to running a bot farm of their own? Would you care?

It's not a mystery. It's simply a matter of whether or not the system needs to make a webpage for the av, and there are reasons why some NPIOF avs need to have webpages.

Whether or not what I do is ethical is a matter of opinion, but I don't consider someone saying that it's unethical to be an insult, provided it is said in the normal way of a discussion. But when people insult me personally, calling me a scammer, liar, bottom feeder, and such, they are insults, and they receive their just rewards from me. I'm not going back to check out what your particular transgressions were, but you are one of those who insulted me, causing me to respond in kind.

You are entitled to your opinion. There's no secret from my side. It's what SL is for me. It's not a place for socialising, although it is for many, perhaps most, of its population. The money I make from it is the score - as in a game. Making money has always been like that for me, even when I needed it to live on.

I'm not being cutthroat about it. I'm simply doing the things that I know to do, to compete. In my experience (not SL), they are normal things to do in order to compete. I wouldn't run the store at all if I didn't compete, and it languished lower down in the rankings.

First: I'm not cheating anyone - that was insulting, btw. Second: what if there is nobody like that? Third: if there is somebody like that, s/he should either learn to compete, or look in another direction for a suitable income. With your sort of reasoning, no RL company would launch major promotions because they will affect the incomes of other companies, small ones too, and some people may actually get layed off. You can't say that a business is wrong to compete in the marketplace because it might affect others. Well, you can, but it isn't going to happen. It's not the way things work.

A lesson in discussion for you, Chip:
If you want to say that you think a person cheating, say,"....... which, imo, it's cheating" and things like that. If you want to insult somebody, say "what about the people you are cheating" and things like that. Don't be at all surprised if you get a barrage of insults back at you if you write things in the wrong way. And don't criticise the person for it. It would have been of your making.

Show me a real world company that doesn't need the money and isn't under pressure from shareholders to make more of it. It's a false comparison. If your SL business is just a game to you and your profits are just a score and you have no real need for the money you make then, again, why try so hard to beat your competition who may have a genuine need for the money? I'm not surprised that you don't consider that a valid concern.

So it would be ok if I had shareholders pressuring me for profits? Would you like to think that through again?

Btw, I added a piece at the end of my previous post. I wouldn't want it to escape your notice.

Show me a competitor who has a real need to make money is SL. If there is one (a genuine one), I'll help him/her, as I've helped others - you've read about that. But until you can show me one, s/he doesn't exist, and your point is valueless.

Were you dropped on your head as a child?

No. Don't you have any answers? Is that your way when your arguments are shot down? Why not answer the question and try to be someone who is able to discuss things, instead of resorting to such stupidities?

So you just assume that none of your competitors need the money then, is that it? They aren't worthy of your consideration unless they can prove a financial need?

You can't answer my questions, Chip? You should think before you walk into them

People who don't exist are not worthy of my consideration - or of anyone else's.

Let me ask you a question...

Do you know anyone in SL who is trying to earn real money from it, and who genuinely has RL difficulties because s/he can't make enough money from SL - and there are no other options?

If you don't know anyone like that, then your point has no meaning. If you do know someone like that, put them in touch with me, and I will help.

Am I to understand from your silence that you don't know anyone like that, Chip? And that these people were just a figment of your imagination - a sort of grasping at straws?

I haven't polled the financial situations of low prim furniture makers, and you've already answered my question. Considering that most SL merchants rely on their profits to pay their tier I'd think that those who claim they don't need the money would tend to be the exception rather than the rule, but then I tend to err on the side of looking out for other people instead of just looking out for myself. YMMV.

I don't see it at all. The one who started the constant name-calling was you. In this thread and in others. In fact you are the only one who persistently keeps the name-calling up at all.

Perhaps you felt insulted by some people's opinions on Trafficbot runners. Thats different than direct personal attacks in the forums.

Surely you can see the difference.

I am frankly surprised you haven't been suspended due to all of the direct personal attacks you have levied. I suppose you are lucky those who disagree with you aren't the type to report bad posts.

Could it be that Phil is ............. a forum insult-bot?

So untrue, Colette. You are not telling the truth. The reason you don't see it is because you prefer not to see it. BUT if you were to actually look, you *will* see that any insults I throw, in any thread at all (except the rare 2 that I've mentioned before) are responses to insults thrown at me. And even those 2 threads were responses to the insults thrown at me in another thread. Now you may imagine that calling someone a scammer and such is not an insult or personal attack, but that's just you being extremely biased, which is nothing new, of course.

Tell me something, Colette. Why don't you criticise other people who throw insults? At the time you read them, you can easily see that they are not responses to mine, because I don't make them until someone insults me.

[added]
Out of curiosity, and to help you, I went back and looked for the first insult in this thread. It came on page 9, post 122, and was written by Chris Norse. He said:-

It's interesting how you seem to be blind to everyone's insults except mine. I responded in kind, of course, but as you can see if you care to look, your statement that "The one who started the constant name-calling was you." was simply wrong. Why do you make such statements when you know they are not true, Colette? Is it just wishful thinking? Is it bare faced lying? Is it just shit stirring? Why do you do it? Let me guess. You do it because you want to paint Phil as black as you can because he uses traffic bots - he's the baddy. And you are pretty certain that people are not going to go back and check. Am I right?

And since you seem to be oblivious to realities when they don't suit your preferences, I'll add that, if you go and look, you'll see the same pattern throughout - someone insults me, and I insult back. I don't claim to just match insult for insult though. Once someone has thrown an insult at me, s/he is fair game for them. I don't subscribe to the idea that they muist be evenly traded, but I do subscribe to the idea that it must be the other person who throws the first one. That applies to all threads, and not just this one.

As I answered you in a previous posting that you did not reply to, neither Phil nor me are cutthroating about anything.
Phil helped the entire SL population (well, forum population) by giving a great deal of information about how the new search works, so anyone can optimze for good results. Without bots, its very possible to get a good ranking, look at mine for example. Furthermore, he helped me with some additional questions I had.
Just this week, I helped a furniture business owner who reacted in this thread, with some valuable advice.

Tell me, when reading the above, in what way are we cutthroating?

Believe me, I do not mind if someone things I am unethical, because I know what I do is not conflicting with my own ethics. Being called a cheater doesn't even hurt me, though I think it is insulting and not true. But hey, everybody their own way of communicating. Only in a rare case I stop discussing with an individual, but only if they have nothing at all to add to the discussion. You are not one of them as you see.

If someone needs the money, they should do a better job. As said before, none of the things I do are secret, and still I am on #2. If one of my competitors wants into the first page of Search All as well, they should investigate the way to get there. And believe me, that can be done without paying for picks and having bots. For me, Paying for Picks just was a way to get there faster, and anyone can do it. If they choose not to, thats up to them.

Again, both Phil and me did help our competitors to improve. Which are actions that do not look like cutthroating, do they? Apparantly we do care more about other people then you think.

I didn't ask about low prim furniture traders in the last question. Anybody will do. But you don't know anyone, so your point has no meaning, and you are just inventing things.

When you first made your point, it sounded like you were talking about people who need the money for RL. That's what this was about until your last post. Now it's dropped down to people who need the money for their tier. No matter, it's still a meaningless point. I'll state the glaringly obvious for you...

Anyone who *needs* to make money in SL to pay their tier should not have tier to pay in the first place. Anyone who can't afford to pay the tier from their RL funds should not get into such a commitment at all. SL is not a society in which everyone makes sure that everyone can pay their bills. That's not saying that people shouldn't hope or desire to pay their tier from their SL earnings. It's saying that they shouldn't *rely* on it because they can't afford it otherwise ('rely' is your word). People aren't stupid enough to do that, so your point has no substance, and the people you speak of don't exist. It's nice to know that there are people like you who take care of those ficticious people though, and at your own expense. Wow! You're my hero lol

Actually, I don't believe that it's at your own expense at all, so you are not my hero after all. I don't believe that you can make significantly more than you already do from SL, or you would do it. I don't believe that using the 'techniques' would be beneficial to what you do. So I do believe that your claim that you deny yourself, by refusing to use certain techniques because of your principles, is totally false. In other words, I believe that you lied about it.

If I'm wrong about that, and if using the techniques really would boost your RL income significantly, and still you refuse to use them on principle, then you deserve a great deal of admiration. There are very few people who would stick to their principles and turn their back on significant money, when money actually matters to them - especially when the competition is using the techniques against them, and the techniques themselves are out in the open, and don't break any rules or laws.

Discussion Lesson #2 - for Chip:
Notice that I said "I believe". I didn't state things about you - I said that I believe certain things about you. The first way could have been insulting, depending on what was said. The second way isn't insulting because it doesn't purport to be a statement of fact - it's merely a statement of opinion.. I hope you're taking these lessons in, and learning from them.

Interesting edit happened here with the addition of "... and the techniques themselves are above board, out in the open, and don't break any rules or laws." It's interesting because before, without that clause, the statement would have been extraordinary. And with the addition, it becomes nonsense: if the techniques are believed to be "above board" then they would not violate that person's principles. (Or if they did, that person would not deserve admiration so much as medication.)

So what is left, but to cycle back to the same argument about whether the techniques are indeed above board?

But that argument has descended to critique of rhetoric. I think this thread is done now.