LL advertising private businesses in their blog?

[ChinRey]

5 minutes ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

Blueberry and the Lab have been cooperating for quite a while. Blueberry provided free clothing gifts for a Linden Lab winter crawl event a couple of years ago.

I didn't know that but it doesn't change anything really.

[Fionalein]

Whow, a second thread where I am the same opinion as Phil... I must make sure this does not become a habit ...

[Love Zhaoying]

Just now, Fionalein said:

Whow, a second thread where I am the same opinion as Phil... I must make sure this does not become a habit ...

Eerie, ain’t it? I gave a detailed opposing viewpoint, and Phil agreed with every point! It’s almost as if he’s evolved!

[Ansiri]

 

7 hours ago, Phil Deakins said:

There isn't actually a Pic Of The Day section. It's the Inworld Section. Pics of the Day and the Look of the Day are in it.

 

It is under the Second Life Pic of the Day.

 

[Cindy Evanier]

5 minutes ago, Ansiri said:

It is under the Second Life Pic of the Day.

Not if you look at the Inworld Blog section

[ellestones]

8 hours ago, Love Zhaoying said:

Eerie, ain’t it? I gave a detailed opposing viewpoint, and Phil agreed with every point! It’s almost as if he’s evolved!

i think Phil, like most everyone else, has learned to not die in every ditch he finds himself in. For sure, some ditches are worth dying in. Others not so much. Accept the offered helping hand. Up, out and cup of tea for everyone. So good on him

[Tari Landar]

10 hours ago, Phil Deakins said:

I think I can answer that one, Tari. The things you mentioned don't include clickable links to, or even information about, places where we can buy them, whereas Xiola's blog post does and, if you're going to advertise something, that's what you do - include a clickable link, or a statement as to where/how you can buy it.

For instance, stating the name of the person who took a picture, without saying that the person will take pictures for money, isn't advertising. It's merely giving someone credit for taking the pic, and there's no suggestion that anything is for sale. I don't see the library items as being pure advertising, but it is in a way, and it's acceptable to me because we are not provided with details on where to buy anything from those creators, so we would have to dig a bit to find out, and it is not even suggested that we can buy anything at all from those creators. On the other hand, Xiola's blog post simply shows items of clothing and links on where to buy each item. There's a huge world of difference.

I call bull puckey on nearly everything you have said...for pages...on the premise that you just like seeing yourself talk and can rarely, if ever, admit when you even *might be wrong, much less actually be wrong. You made assumptions on page one...and have been making them every page since, lol. 

Do you think you can't click on the name of a creator in the edit box to get information on where to buy, how to get, their store? No, I know you don't think that Phil, don't be silly. 

Do you think you can't find those folks' names in search VERY easily, and find out what their business is(whatever it may be, should one exist) and find out all this information? Nope again, I know you don't think that.

You're trying to create some kind of structure from straws here, and it's not working Phil, it's just not, lol. At this point, it would be funny if you weren't trying so damn hard ot be right, lol.  You started this discussion, you brought the name of Blueberry into this, you tied both the giveaway Blueberry was having, with the Linden's post together as if it was some unjust conspiracy to benefit only certain people...you, blatantly, ignored the countless other blog posts that...doh, also have links to creators.

Dude....how can you STILL not let go and just say "well, my bad...I done messed up", at this point? Even people that actually agree with you on the basic idea that LL advertising some, and not advertising others my not be a very smart move, probably won't be seen as fair, and very well may get them backlash. But you're still at it, plugging away like you've actually got something different to add....and yet ya don't, lmao. 

Look, I loathe shopping, I loathe fashion, though I may know a wee bit more than you, it's probably not by much, but even I know what those blog posts look like and why they do, why the links exist and that this is pretty typical. I dunno how you can be this smart-because I know you are-and also pretend to be this dumb(sorry but you're painting yourself as pretty dumb, and we both know you're not) at the same time, lol. 

10 hours ago, ChinRey said:

No, that's not the case here. It's just too close in time to the Premium Membership deal. There is absolutely no way that was a coincidence. Xiola did not write that blogpost because she felt like it, she posted it because that was part of whatever deal LL had made with Blueberry.

 

I do it all the time myself, as I'm sure you and just about everybody else do.

But when you recommend a product by somebody you or an organisation you represent is affiliated with, you are obliged to mention it. Xiola didn't and that is actually a very serious mistake.

Feel free to continue to see a conspiracy my friend....even if I may agree that LL blatantly advertising for some and not others in their "official spaces" isn't wise...I'm not drinking that koolaid, lol. 

 

[JoJo Aurelia]

I own nearly every fat pack Blue puts out.. I remember the notice about free accounts. It seemed like a trial run perhaps they'll offer other designers the same chance if they're talented and successful. Nothing wrong with promoting the best of SL

[Ethan Paslong]

36 minutes ago, Faye Feldragonne said:

 perhaps they'll offer other designers the same chance if they're talented and successful. Nothing wrong with promoting the best of SL

and there it goes wrong, who is going to decide what is talented and succesfull?
Many of the big brands sell premade stuff that's only re textured .. is that talented?
Many of the talented people have very smalll business or work only for friends... is that succesfull?

With those two as requierement they'll shoot in their own feet again, and they will attrackt people for the wrong reasons,  many regular customers will start to avoid those stores, and not bad meant, but you need your regulars... those are the spenders.

With all pro's and contra's here, i'm still at my own opinion: LL stay out of this.

 

Edited September 4, 2018 by Ethan Paslong

[Phil Deakins]

13 hours ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

The 2008 starter avatars came with notecards in their folders with greetings from the (independent merchant) makers which have links to their in-world stores. They're still there - look in the Library under "Clothing - Older Outfits."

Ok. I wasn't aware of that. But they are still different because the creators gave the avatars freely for anyone to use.

[Phil Deakins]

11 hours ago, Ansiri said:

 

It is under the Second Life Pic of the Day.

 

That's just a promoted blog. In the Blogs section, there are several blogs listed, one of which is Inwords. That's where all the PicOfTheDays are. There isn't a seperate section for them.

[Phil Deakins]

3 hours ago, Tari Landar said:

I call bull puckey on nearly everything you have said...for pages...on the premise that you just like seeing yourself talk and can rarely, if ever, admit when you even *might be wrong, much less actually be wrong. You made assumptions on page one...and have been making them every page since, lol. 

That's absolute nonsense, Tari, and I'm quite sure that you know it.

The rest of your post is fine except that you totally missed the point. Of course you can find out who created anything you like, and find the place to buy it if it's for sale, but you dig a bit for the information. The difference between an advertisement and the need to dig is that an advertisement provides all that information in the ad, whereas non-advertisements dont. You have to dig if you're interested. For instance, it takes a heck of a stretch to say that a creator's name in an item's Edit box (normally unseen, incidentally) is the same as a page that displays an item with a link to the place where you can buy it. That's one heck of a stretch.

I'm sorry, but an ad is an ad, and a page displaying items, with links to where they can be bought, is an ad, whether that was the intention or not.

I realise that you disagree, Tari. I don't know why you disagree, because there's nothing to disagree with. All you've done is claim that things like items in the library, and credits to picture takers, are the same when they are not. If they were the same, then I'd question those too, but they're not.

Edited September 4, 2018 by Phil Deakins

[Phil Deakins]

14 hours ago, Love Zhaoying said:

Eerie, ain’t it? I gave a detailed opposing viewpoint, and Phil agreed with every point! It’s almost as if he’s evolved!

Yeah. But your opposing viewpoints didn't oppose anything, and they were all lifted from the posts of me and others earlier in the thread

[Phil Deakins]

5 hours ago, ellestones said:

i think Phil, like most everyone else, has learned to not die in every ditch he finds himself in. For sure, some ditches are worth dying in. Others not so much. Accept the offered helping hand. Up, out and cup of tea for everyone. So good on him

I'm reminded of a ditch I was in from waaaay back - back in the days of RA. It seemed like the entire forum population was against me - and they were all wrong.  It was all about what the phrase "many, perhaps most" actually means. What it doesn't mean is 'the majority', but they all insisted that it does. It does mean 'perhaps the majority', but they all insisted that it actually meas 'the majority' - no maybe about it. They were all wrong, of course. Some of them apologised privately afterwards and some didn't. I only remember one of them who was in it., and she was something of a ringleader. She still posts here. She never apologised, which is why I rarely acknowledge her posts in any way.

I've been in some ditches, but I've always managed to make it through to the cup of tea

Edited September 4, 2018 by Phil Deakins

[Tari Landar]

31 minutes ago, Phil Deakins said:

That's absolute nonsense, Tari, and I'm quite sure that you know it.

The rest of your post is fine except that you totally missed the point. Of course you can find out who created anything you like, and find the place to buy it if it's for sale, but you dig a bit for the information. The difference between an advertisement and the need to dig is that an advertisement provides all that information in the ad, whereas non-advertisements dont. You have to dig if you're interested. For instance, it takes a heck of a stretch to say that a creator's name in an item's Edit box (normally unseen, incidentally) is the same as a page that displays an item with a link to the place where you can buy it. That's one heck of a stretch.

I'm sorry, but an ad is an ad, and a page displaying items, with links to where they can be bought, is an ad, whether that was the intention or not.

I realise that you disagree, Tari. I don't know why you disagree, because there's nothing to disagree with. All you've done is claim that things like items in the library, and credits to picture takers, are the same when they are not. If they were the same, then I'd question those too, but they're not.

People reading that blog, in order to click the links, or even actually go find the specific item(s)/place, etc...have as much work to do(extra clicks, a bit of physical searching around a location, inworld/mp search, etc.) must *also be interested, at least somewhat. Those not interested, don't click the links, don't visit the stores or locations, don't join the group(s) associated with the item(s) covered in the blog post, don't visit the mp stores, and don't actively look for ways to get more info. The interest must exist in order for any advertisement to actually be successful, regardless of what form it is presented to us. So yep, they are more alike than they are different, and I never said they were exactly the same, of course they're not, lol. 

I already stated that I don't disagree with everything you  have said, in regards to whether or not it's a good idea for an LL employee, or LL itself to outright advertise in a specifically LL owned space. I disagree with your methodology used to tie two totally separate things together as if they were the same, though, like it was some underhanded dealing that only one creator was privy to. No one else tied those two together before you did. 

Advertising comes in many forms, and I am well aware that you know this, of course, given your experience. If I were to mention, in casual conversation-here on the forums, to a perfect stranger, to my best friend... my favorite sl creators, photographers, sim owners, even sims, am I not offering them some type of advertising? I do believe that I am. 

If I had my own blog, and I mentioned those same things, I am also advertising. If I rez things on my property created by others, I am advertising. Hell even wearing things, we are advertising for those creators. Maybe it's intentionally an ad, maybe it's not, situational of course, but, still advertising. 

So yes, I do agree with you that an ad is an ad-no matter the form, or even intent. 

On whether the blog post was INTENDED to be an outright advertisement for "a select few",  you seem to believe it was, and I feel rather indifferent about that. Yes, it's still a form of advertising, just not a super secret one intended for only particular folks. You based your posts on the belief that such advertisement opportunities is not an equal opportunity for all-stated it in more ways than one, in multiple posts, and I disagreed, and still do, with that point of view. I do believe that, should things like this happen again(though I doubt it will after this thread, lol) the equal opportunity to be mentioned by a linden, or anyone else that is blogging, talking about their favorite this that or the other, or anyone else, will exist. Does it mean everyone will be "chosen"...nope. Doesn't mean the opportunity wasn't there though.  Maybe that clarifies why I disagree with you a bit better. If not..I'm gonna sleep on that and get back to ya.

Bad form for an LL employee to use an LL space for it? Yep. Bad form for an LL employee to do it anywhere else? Nope. Just like it wouldn't be bad form for anyone else to do it. LL employees aren't on the clock 24/7

[Love Zhaoying]

1 hour ago, Phil Deakins said:

It seemed like the entire forum population was against me - and they were all wrong. 

...

[Love Zhaoying]

1 hour ago, Phil Deakins said:

Yeah. But your opposing viewpoints didn't oppose anything, and they were all lifted from the posts of me and others earlier in the thread

No. I came up with my points independently, I did not “lift” them. How rude.

[Phil Deakins]

2 hours ago, Tari Landar said:

Bad form for an LL employee to use an LL space for it? Yep. Bad form for an LL employee to do it anywhere else? Nope. Just like it wouldn't be bad form for anyone else to do it. LL employees aren't on the clock 24/7

With that I agree completely. I posted my agreement to it earlier in the thread.

[Phil Deakins]

1 hour ago, Love Zhaoying said:

No. I came up with my points independently, I did not “lift” them. How rude.

Alright. I'll give you credit for independant thinking, but they were all points that I and others had made much earlier in the thread.

[Ceka Cianci]

 

hehehehe

[Phil Deakins]

Just out of interest, and in view of a post in another thread, there are no rights and wrongs expressed in this thread. There are only opinions, and the opinions are right for those who posted them, whether they differ with other people's opinions or not.

It's the opinion of some people that LL should not promote some customers if the same sort of promotion isn't available to all customers. It's the opinion of some other people that it's fine for LL to promote some customers without offering the same to all customers. Both opinions are right for those who hold them.

(The fact that mine is more right than yours is irrelevant )

Edited September 4, 2018 by Phil Deakins

[Luna Bliss]

26 minutes ago, Phil Deakins said:

It's the opinion of some people that LL should not promote some customers if the same sort of promotion isn't available to all customers. It's the opinion of some other people that it's fine for LL to promote some customers without offering the same to all customers.

Why do you believe it's wrong?

[Phil Deakins]

35 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

Why do you believe it's wrong?

We've been through it at length before, but the short version is that it's detrimental to (at the expense of) other paying customers.

[Phil Deakins]

20 hours ago, Fionalein said:

Whow, a second thread where I am the same opinion as Phil... I must make sure this does not become a habit ...

There's only one cure for that, and it's a sure-fire cure. Quit the forum altogether.

 

(don't you dare quit the forum!)

[Blueberryxx]

Hey guys, 

I wish one of you had given me an IM! I would have clarified it. Anyone and I mean anyone can gift premium memberships, all you have to do is have balance in your account and open a support ticket for it. I paid fully for all the premium memberships I gifted. There was (sadly) no special treatments. I hope this information leads to some best friends getting premium account gifts for Christmas. It's coming up you guys.

I am sorry it didn't seem clear, it honest to god never crossed my mind that anyone would think Linden Lab is paying for a very random give away I did.

Although not going to lie, would be sweet of them to do their own regular give aways just to acknowledge the support of this community. 

Now I will go check out the look of the day page and possibly frame it because, contrary to what is discussed here, I am main page cursed and only ever made it 4 times in 5 years. 

If a confusion like this arises again I am literally 1 IM away and love to chat too, don't feel shy to reach out ❤️ 

Edited September 4, 2018 by Blueberryxx
typoqueen, dont judge me