BOT places! List them here!

bleh, bleh, bleh, bleh, bleh

the most annoying thread ever

Why wait for November? Vote early, and often.

dang I'd have to say there were more annoying ones than this.

And you enjoying annoying yourself why?

Because

... newsflash ...

No one is forcing you to read it!

I looked at Phils profile C&P the URL, Tp'd to the store and recognised I had been there at some point and made purchases. I have made purchases at dozens of SL shops, I didn't recall specifics until I got around to checking it out

I am not pro anything. I have said earlier in the thread, I can see both sides of the argument. I have also said I didn't fully understand the implications, nor was I even aware of what a bot was. I have expressed my ignorance on this subject early in this thread.

I have never even had a conversation with Phil, so no we are not friends. Until this thread I was unaware my day to day SL experience is affected by bots. I am just a casual non technical user, who enjoys the social aspects of SL, shopping and decorating.

Gosh, you are all awfully cynical, I don't know Phil, I am not for or against the use of Bots, I do not fully understand all the implications, I'm just trying to get some perspective on the subject and trying to remain unbiased until I do understand it.

But you do sound like his sister!

Fair enough. But giving us your perspective, which just so happens to be pro Traffic-Bot, and attempting to lend it support and credibility by framing it as that of the "most-of-us" general end users perspective does not sound very unbiased at all.



Unless, of course, you have done research and/or a scientific poll that reflects this information. Or you have been anointed the "most of us, end user" spokesperson, in which case I will then stand corrected.

I have no intention of arguing with any of you, your nastiness is unnecessary and shouldn't be directed at me.

Nastiness?

It's called a debate. Albeit, a heated one at times.

Can we assume you will no longer be partaking in it?.

I don't think you should assume anything

If I am compelled to comment further, I certainly will exercise my right to do so!

Now you're getting the hang of it.

So as a hypothetical ..

Would it be fair for you to vote once in November's election and the voter in the booth next to you .. say his name was Phil ... gets to vote 21 times?

No, but Phil could go out into the community and pay 20 people to vote for him. I imagine the FEC would have a thing or two to say about that, though.

Bella,

Don't worry about the nastiness from some. It is just showing that if you are not against bots, you either sleep with Phil or me, or are biased in some other way, because you simply cannot NOT be against bots. There is a relatively small group of people that simply hates the use of bots, or picks camping, and they want to ventilate that as often as possible. Nothing wrong with that, as long as it is kept in the threads about bots. What is a tad sad, is that they now try to prove you are either wrong with your opinion, or a friend of Phil. Apparantly they do not think you are entitled to your own opinion.

Now I ment not to post anymore in this thread, but things are turning too weird not to post. I've seen postings from people, I really would have given more credit. People of who I am convinced they do not lack the intelligence, come up with the most stupid arguments that I can think of. Probably a result of letting emotions do the discussing, instead of the mind. You anti botters are very much entitled to your opinion then anyone, but as soon as you try to deny others to have an opinion not similar to yours, you are very very wrong in your behaviour.

You can call me unethical, you do not have to agree with me and what I do, but as soon as you fall back to words like scammer, and even thief, you loose a lot of respect. And getting ruder each posting does not make your arguments stronger either.

Bottomline: Bella is one of the tens of thousands consumers on Second Life, and she tells you all she does not care how Phil got his ranking, she was able to find what she was looking for. Just as about every customer in his shop, or mine for that matter. Like it or not, the majority feels this way. As long as a shop does not advertise with false keywords, people find what they are looking for and are generally pleased.

Your Bottomline has absolutely nothing to do with the issue of search gaming.
If search could not be manipulated using traffic bots and paid picks, people would still find what they were looking for. What is your point exactly?
Bella's observations and your bottomline are not relevant to the question.

The question is that of subverting search with exploits. That is dishonest.
The gaming impels LL to divert development resources. That is theft from LL and from SL as a whole.

Whoa Marcel those are big claims to make.

One testimonial does not a majority make.

Instead you think her comments are what the majority believe.

------------

I have met plenty of people who hate going to those mega islands with 100K traffic and 400K classified adds also.

But that doesn't make them a majority either.

Not that what the majority thinks either way would mean the practice were right or wrong.

Fair enough Colette.
The reason I say majority, is because of the fact that people keep on shopping at places like Phil's or like mine. More or less proving they are glad they found our places, and like what we created. And of course, there are places that have lower ranking and might have products better suited, but you will always have that, no matter what system is used. But some people here claim they have the only truth, and that is bull. You have your opinion, I have mine, and neither is right or wrong.

You must see though, that arguments are becoming ruder, and I hope you understand that as soon as people are calling me thief/scammer/worse then a griefer, they loose any respect from me they had. People do not have to agree with any of my arguments, but they should keep things in perspective. As soon as they start posting like for example Slings last 2 post, they become nothing but a joke.

One thing is important in any discussion, and that is leaving people in their value (if that is any valid translation of the dutch saying...). As soon as they cannot do that anymore, I really wonder how much better they are, then the so called scammers they appear to be fighting.

Chip. Don't change the subject. You told Bella that we were "scamming" certain people. I'm sure you know what a scam is. If you didn't before, you should know now. I've posted it twice for you. We are not scamming anyone.

You may say that we are cheating, and I will disagree with the judgement, but I will accept that, in your way of thinking, we are cheating. Scamming is something quite specific though, and we don't do that. If you honestly think that we do, then you don't understand what a scam is.

Man, you are so dumb. I've been laughing at you in this thread. I came into it to laugh at you anti-bots, and I've been totally consistent in ny reasonings. Perhaps you would like to show us a "twist and turn"? It's all still here, so let's see it

Both you and Phil might regain the respect that would normally be due to you be default if you were to debate honestly.
Again I have to ask you how people like Bella shopping at your places has anything to do with the rights and wrongs of traffic gaming.

Let me ask you the sort of simple short questions that Phil avoided answering directly.
Do you accept that LL's intention was that traffic be an indicator of popularity?
Do you accept that LL's intention was that Picks would also be an indicator of popularity?

If you think that Phil has actually answered those questions, what do you believe his answers to have been?


I think I understand what your translation of the Dutch phase means.
However, if people want to be left in their value, then they have to be straightforward with others.
I find that trying to debate the core issues with you and Phil is like trying to debate with a ball of cotton wool.

Are the questions above so hard to answer?

Now you're trying to tell us that it's wrong to "get more sales at the expense of the competition". Who is being naive now?

I don't believe I've ever met Bella. It's such a very low tactic to try and paint everyone black who doesn't agree with you.

There are no significant implications, Bella. The anti-bots invent them, because they want SL to be a sort of utopia, where RL things don't come in. They want SL to remain exclusive from the rest of reality. They want it to be a fun/hobby place, and not a real business place. But what they want is out of step with LL's intentions for the platform. There are very few of them, and they lost their battle on the day that SL opened.

You can see the way they work. You have a neutral and independant view, and they don't like it because it doesn't side with them. So now more than one of them is tring to tarnish you by suggesting that we are in some way connected. If they can link you to me, then they can fool themselves into believing that your views don't count. They are so into themselves that any view that doesn't agree with them isn't possible, so there must be a reason for it - hence we must be connected. It's typical of them.

Well I like to brighten peoples' days
Just remember that he who laughs last, laughs alone.


How about some straight simple answers to straight simple questions on the core of the issue?
No smokescreen. No 'the answer is somewhere back in 900+ postings'.
Say someone were to come across this thread and not have time to read all of the postings?

Do you accept that LL's intention was for a traffic == popularity measure?
Do you accept that LL's intention for Picks was the same?

Is Bella really your sister, or do you at least have the same father?