Please let us see bots.

[Selene Gregoire]

8 minutes ago, Phil Deakins said:

you'd like to page one or two forum Lindens to give their views.

If you had read the thread, you'd know I did just that a few pages back.

You can sit there and tell me I am wrong all you want. It's never going to make you right.

[Phil Deakins]

That's right. A person keeping on saying that black is white can never make it true. In this case though, I'm not trying to make anything true that isn't already true, because I am right, and you are not. You've never seen anything from LL that says anything different to what I've said. Your view is just what you imagine, presumably because you weren't around at the time, and, for some reason, you've jumped to a wrong conclusion.

Incidentally, I've followed the whole thread, so I did see your page, but that was before this little sub-topic came up.

Edited March 16, 2019 by Phil Deakins

[Selene Gregoire]

1 hour ago, Phil Deakins said:

because I am right, and you are not.

So you are arrogant and conceited. That pretty much says it all.

I've been a resident since 2004 and have known a Linden or two, one of whom I knew from Active Worlds prior to leaving AW and coming to SL.

Edited March 16, 2019 by Selene Gregoire

[Shudo]

On 3/16/2019 at 6:35 AM, Selene Gregoire said:

Simply using a bot/scripted agent as a "normal" account, like exploring the grid, chatting with friends, that sort of thing. Using it that way is not the intended usage. LL doesn't have to overlook the fact that people do do that, but they do. As long as you don't make a habit of it, you'd probably be fine. Probably.

Yes

To neither of you in particular...

The two spanners that make this intense focus on the minutiae a little silly. The lab have never been ones for stating *anything* clearly. And even if it's written in black and white, governance are inconsistant and likely to ignore what's written and to discipline for something else all together.

So, they do normally turn a blind eye to misuse of this flag, and honestly, in the grand sceme of things, it's not a huge sin to misrepresent yourself as a "bot". The worst that can likely happen is your false, human controlled, scripted agent will be auto-logged out of a shopping event.

In general, intense focus on the smallest "legal details" of this only serve to cause headbutting betweens people's stubborness. And that brings in Kirsten with her old lady animated GIF, which Maddy always sets on fire.

I myself have had my "scripted agent" status set as active on all my main and my alts since it appeared. Not only because I am bit contrary, but I do prefer not to count on people's dwell as I run about doing my job.

Edited March 16, 2019 by Shudo

[sirhc DeSantis]

To reply to the OP (oh so many pixels ago) - yeah why not.

Been a long time since I went oooh lotsa dots == fun! But bots in general do have one thing in their favour (and yeah what pronoun to use) - they are at least logged in.

[Coffee Pancake]

 

[Hintswen Guardian]

On 3/16/2019 at 3:21 AM, Selene Gregoire said:

Someone was claiming that bots don't/can't violate LL policy for using too many resources on a sim/region:

http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Linden_Lab_Official:Inworld_policy_on_bots

 

This policy REALLY needs to be changed. Under this policy, a bot cannot send a single notice to a group with more than 5,000 users. This about that... a popular store with 5,000 members in the group cannot use a bot to announce a sale or special event.

[Coffee Pancake]

Just now, Hintswen Guardian said:

This policy REALLY needs to be changed. Under this policy, a bot cannot send a single notice to a group with more than 5,000 users. This about that... a popular store with 5,000 members in the group cannot use a bot to announce a sale or special event.

Remember that every rule exists because someone abused the system and it had to be put in.

[Blush Bravin]

11 minutes ago, Hintswen Guardian said:

This policy REALLY needs to be changed. Under this policy, a bot cannot send a single notice to a group with more than 5,000 users. This about that... a popular store with 5,000 members in the group cannot use a bot to announce a sale or special event.

Does anyone really use a bot to send group notices? I can't think of one group I'm in that does so. In the case where a merchant has to send updates, it would be a vendor system doing the work not a bot. I'm trying to think of what would be the advantage to having a bot send a group notice.

[Shudo]

3 minutes ago, Blush Bravin said:

I'm trying to think of what would be the advantage to having a bot send a group notice.

Main one for me is when I am offline, I can SSH to my server from my iphone, and issue a simple text command.

One can't log into SL from everywhere, and sometimes being able to chat in group chat, or send a notice is ideal.

But that's just me.

Edited March 17, 2019 by Shudo

[Blush Bravin]

1 minute ago, Shudo said:

Main one for me is when I am offline, I can SSH to my server from my iphone, and issue a simple text command.

One can't log into SL from everywhere, and sometimes being able to chat in group chat, or send a notice is ideal.

But that's just me.

But if you are initiating the text command that's not a bot, is it?

[Shudo]

1 minute ago, Blush Bravin said:

But if you are initiating the text command that's not a bot, is it?

Hmm, great question! Is human speech through a controlled bot, a bot. well, I do it through a bot.

Interestingly, I can use him to IM people as well, my command something like "/im blush bravin Hi Blush!". And this, I consider might be a violation of the sharing IM rules  hehe. 

On your question earlier, I think that a scheduled group notice might be a bit rude. I see that as spammy, and the Lab do discipline people for group notice spam.

[Hintswen Guardian]

4 minutes ago, Blush Bravin said:

Does anyone really use a bot to send group notices? I can't think of one group I'm in that does so. In the case where a merchant has to send updates, it would be a vendor system doing the work not a bot. I'm trying to think of what would be the advantage to having a bot send a group notice.

Yes, people do use bots to send group notices, especially in cases where something starts at a specific time or is triggered by a certain event eg. Linden Gold Hunters uses a bot to send a group notice any time a gold rush starts. There are 37450 members in the group and during a 1 hour period, there were 4 notices sent out. That equates to 149800 messages or almost 30 times the daily limit in just that one hour period.

I have seen stores use bots to announce the weekend deal so the creator doesn't need to login, or to announce the monthly group gift when the month starts.

[Blush Bravin]

1 minute ago, Hintswen Guardian said:

Yes, people do use bots to send group notices, especially in cases where something starts at a specific time or is triggered by a certain event eg. Linden Gold Hunters uses a bot to send a group notice any time a gold rush starts. There are 37450 members in the group and during a 1 hour period, there were 4 notices sent out. That equates to 149800 messages or almost 30 times the daily limit in just that one hour period.

I have seen stores use bots to announce the weekend deal so the creator doesn't need to login, or to announce the monthly group gift when the month starts.

Ahhhh. Guess I'm just old fashioned. I do all that stuff myself. The only bot I've ever used were my two alts that modeled in the shop all those years ago. They were pretty useless I guess. They didn't do notices or send messages for me or anything nifty like that! I should have fired them. Oh wait, I did!  

[Shudo]

3 minutes ago, Hintswen Guardian said:

Linden Gold Hunters uses a bot to send a group notice any time a gold rush starts.

A notice, or chat in group?

That group would be annoying as hell if it loads in 100 notices a day!

[Hintswen Guardian]

18 minutes ago, Shudo said:

A notice, or chat in group?

That group would be annoying as hell if it loads in 100 notices a day!

I always thought it was a chat message, turns out it's a notice for gold rush, chat message for fish multipliers. I turned off the group notices long ago.

[Hintswen Guardian]

1 hour ago, CoffeeDujour said:

Remember that every rule exists because someone abused the system and it had to be put in.

In that case then, LL needs to enforce their policies... oh wait that isn't going to happen.

[Phil Deakins]

11 hours ago, Selene Gregoire said:

So you are arrogant and conceited. That pretty much says it all.

I've been a resident since 2004 and have known a Linden or two, one of whom I knew from Active Worlds prior to leaving AW and coming to SL.

Nope - not arrogant and conceited. Just right. Knowing you are right about something doesn't make you arrogant or conceited. It just makes you knowledgable about it. We all have knowledge about many things but it doesn't make us arrogant or conceited. And I don't lower myself to posting insults when I've lost the argument because I have no evidence to support my claim - like wot some people do

So, a question... In your opinion, are you arrogant and conceited because you insist that you are right? You may be arrogant and conceited, but I don't think so. I may be wrong, but imo, you are just mistaken, that's all.

And knowing a Linden or two does not mean anything, except that you have known a couple of people who work(ed) for LL. I knew one on a personal level for a while, but I wouldn't dream of claiming that it gave me any knowledge about this, because it didn't. I imagine yours didn't either, so I don't know why you even mentioned it. If you know any Lindens NOW, though, perhaps you'd like to ask them about this little detail. That might be the only way that you can accept the truth, because there isn't any written evidence.

Alternatively, when you can show anything at all that LL has written or posted that says what you claim, then I'll stand corrected. That's not going to happen because nothing exists, so it remains just a figment of your imagination, and you've been corrected. More to the point, anyone who read and believed the wrong information that you wrote, has had the opportunity to read the correct information. Whether they believe it or not is up to them, but at least the truth has been presented to them.

ETA: You may have been in SL since 2004, but I don't remember you in the forum until relatively recently, so you may not have been fully aware of what the 'scripted agent' status was, and is, about.

Edited March 17, 2019 by Phil Deakins

[Phil Deakins]

@Selene Gregoire

I was just re-reading the previous post and something occured to me - about evidence for our claims. You don't have any, or you would have shown it already. You might think that I don't have any either, but that would be wrong. My evidence is that LL has written nothing at all to say how a scripted agent must, or must not, be used. Therefore, a scripted agent can be used in any way that the user sees fit, as long as it doesn't break any rules.

You wrote about it as though it's a rule that can be broken, with subsequent consequences. But it's not a rule. If it were a rule, LL would have written it down for us to see. Not even LL punishes people for breaking rules that they've decided not to tell us about. So, since what you claim is not covered anywhere in LL's documentation, it cannot be a rule that we must abide by.

I hope that makes things a bit clearer.

ETA: My guess is that, when the scripted agent status came in, you just assumed that LL created a system for bots, and that they intended scripted agents to be used as bots. But that isn't what they did, or their intention. They created a system solely for the purpose of allowing bots to be used on search-enabled land without counting for traffic. That's all they did.

I'm also guessing that that assumption has been with you for a very long time without any reason to question it. Until now. So it's become very deep-seated, which makes you reluctant even wonder if you might have been mistaken all this time. That's my best guess.

Edited March 17, 2019 by Phil Deakins

[Skell Dagger]

I freely admit my ignorance concerning scripted agents and/or bots, so I'm not here to take sides. Nor am I here to be 'edumacated' by anyone, since nobody but Linden Lab has the authority to inform me either way of their 'official status', therefore - if they have declined to do so - then there is no 'official status' to be had, and thus nobody can claim to be right or wrong. And just like a lack of consent doesn't mean 'yes' so a lack official information doesn't mean that one user's definition is better or more 'right' than another user's.

However, that's beside the point. The point of my post here is that this, Phil -

3 hours ago, Phil Deakins said:

I don't remember you in the forum until relatively recently, so you may not have been fully aware of what the 'scripted agent' status was, and is, about.

- is wobbly ground. Just because you don't remember someone being active in the forums in the past (or even ever, until recently) that does not in any way mean they are unaware of what's going on regarding technical and other aspects of Second Life. Do you remember me posting on the SL 'blogorums' (as I believe they were nicknamed) after RA closed down? No, because I stopped posting altogether at that point, and only returned 'relatively recently'. But that doesn't mean I am unaware of everything that occurred within SL during those years.

That said, some advice for Selene from a certain Sicilian:

Edited March 17, 2019 by Skell Dagger

[Fionalein]

11 hours ago, Hintswen Guardian said:

This policy REALLY needs to be changed. Under this policy, a bot cannot send a single notice to a group with more than 5,000 users. This about that... a popular store with 5,000 members in the group cannot use a bot to announce a sale or special event.

If you own a group that size hire someone and bribe them with free goodies to do so, workforce is cheap in SL...

Edited March 17, 2019 by Fionalein

[Phil Deakins]

@Skell Dagger

Yes, it's wobbly ground, Skell, and certainly not put forward as actual evidence. That's why I used the word 'may', as in. "... so you may not have been fully aware ...".

Similarly, it's interesting to note that nobody has agreed with Selene's opinion, and you know as well as I do that there are people in this thread who would jump at siding with someone against me if the opportunity arose. But they haven't done it. That's not actual evidence either, but it does have a similarity

Edited March 17, 2019 by Phil Deakins

[Phil Deakins]

2 hours ago, Skell Dagger said:

then there is no 'official status' to be had, and thus nobody can claim to be right or wrong.

On the contrary, Skell. When someone says that there is an 'official status' when there isn't, that person is certainly wrong, and the one who says, 'there is no official status to be had' can claim to be right.

Note: the 'official status' in this case, would be LL's rule that scripted agents must not be used as normal human-operated agents. That rule doesn't exist.

[Skell Dagger]

Read my lips, Phil:

3 hours ago, Skell Dagger said:

I'm not here to take sides. Nor am I here to be 'edumacated' by anyone

Kindly stop trying to pull me into this debate. When someone has stated that they are not interested in debating, and a second person - ignoring their wishes - tries to draw them in regardless - that's verging on trollish behaviour. And you're better than that, aren't you?

[Coffee Pancake]

19 minutes ago, Skell Dagger said:

And you're better than that, aren't you?

We're 10 pages deep and most of that has been pedantry ....