Jump to content
You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 67 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, Coffee Pancake said:

This whole thread is a self aggrandizing L$ thirst trap.

Post history would probably confirm that.  😄

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 305
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

@Wili Clip I'm a bit bored so I thought I'd write a post to you. Some forum long-timers know me and bots from way back, but I want to tell you something from back then. I got into using traffic-b

My honest opinion, this concern seems disingenuous. You worry that bots are causing traffic to be calculated for the wrong reason, yet operate a system which attempts to monetizes and manipulates traf

By now you should realize it's not the reputation of your product that's in question here.

Posted Images

48 minutes ago, Doc Carling said:

I remember the camping times which led to the business idea that organized gangs of alts jumped from place to place and collected all available prizes.

I have mixed memories :) 10+ avatar sitting one chair.. chair text changes "sit here 2 minutes for L$5" immediately 20 avatar sits on chair with a mixed glitch/stack.

Strange old times :P

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, RunawayBunny said:

I have mixed memories :) 10+ avatar sitting one chair.. chair text changes "sit here 2 minutes for L$5" immediately 20 avatar sits on chair with a mixed glitch/stack.

Strange old times :P

Sounds very familar to me. lol

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

@Wili Clip I'm a bit bored so I thought I'd write a post to you. Some forum long-timers know me and bots from way back, but I want to tell you something from back then.

I got into using traffic-bots because of one particular thing. I sold low prim furniture but, for the phrase 'low prim furniture', I was continually outranked by a particular store in the only search system that existed at the time - now called the legacy search. That store did sell furniture but it wasn't low prim, and I discovered that the traffic there wasn't due to the store at all. It was due to their club being on the same parcel. In the store's search rankings, it was false traffic. The club generated the traffic and the store reaped the benefit, to the detriment of competing stores with genuine store-based traffic.

That is exactly what you are advertising - false traffic for places like stores and clubs, so that they can rank higher in search. Instead of the club I mentioned, you offer fishing. But it's not fishing that you sell. Your advertisements' headlines don't say things like 'Build a fun fishing community' or even things like, 'Fishers will come and shop in your store'. They say things like, "Increase traffic' and 'Grow Sim Traffic'. It's all about traffic. You don't advertise fishing as a fun thing, or a social thing, or even a method of attracting people to stores. You advertise it as a means of increasing traffic, so that stores and such can have false traffic for the purpose of ranking higher in the legacy search. It's about traffic, not fishing, not community, not social, not fun, just traffic.

If that is not "SERIOUSLY breaking Second Life search" then neither are traffic-bots. You could use the headline, 'Game The Search Results LEGALLY', because that's what the fishing product is intended for.

I'll add that I'm not against traffic-bots, or your traffic-fishing method. I used bots to successfully compete against the store I mentioned, and as the forum long-timers know, I used traffic-bots extensively back then. So I'm not criticising your traffic-fishing method. I'm finding fault with you for starting a thread to criticise bots for breaking Second Life Search when your own product is designed and intended to do exactly the same thing - to break Second Life Search.

Would I be right in thinking that your customers have difficulty competing against places that use traffic-bots? They must have. Any bot-runner worth his/her salt would use enough bots to outrank competing places that are only using fishing. Is that the reason for this thread?

Edited by Phil Deakins
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Phil Deakins said:

That is exactly what you are advertising - false traffic for places like stores and clubs, so that they can rank higher in search.

I am not advertising false traffic. We have a strict anti bot policy in our games that we enforce. And it works! We have community growth and community is vibrant. I am communicating and giving information on what works for us with hope that people to whom this topic is relevant in Linden Lab can copy it and appy in SL. All it takes is just stricter enforcement of anti bot traffic gami g.

Now I understand why those who use bots for traffic hate me. But I am willing to go through some hate to propagate for solutions that will help grow SL and lead towards its greater success for everyone.

I know how bots are damaging for communities and for SL on overall.

I also think LL lowering the traffic significance for lands in search was a good move. Search needs to be affected by multiple factors and land traffic is only one of multiple. Still traffic is important indicator and gaming traffic with bots is by SL TOS a violation. SL can benefit on overall if LL enforces it.

The main problem of bots is new users of SL not being able to find real people to have social interactions with because they land on lands full of bots. LL is loosing significant % of new users because of that. This is affecting new users retention rate. User retention rate is lower than it could be. Second Life could have greater growth in new users that stay in SL and spend their RL money into SL economy.

If you are a business in SL then anything that affects new users retention rate negatively is bad for you and for SL economy on overall.

Not all people in SL are using search functionality for shopping. That is only 1 of many things people search. And to be realistic with you.. most people because of greater conveniance shop on SL Marketplace. Search now days is more used to find social places of interest in SL to hang out and meet like minded people, to find land to rent and many others.

Second Life is all about communities. I base my business success on learning about and being aware of what most people want and miss in SL. It is the same thing as we do in RL - more meaningful social interactions and connections with other people. In short - friends.

Yes some people like to shop in SL. But you need to ask yourself why and what for? Well when you buy something new you want to display it to others. Most things people buy beside for fashion and self unique style expression are status symbols.

I don't know why some people here vilify me because I create games. Reason why I make them isbecause I know they grow SL. As I explained it also helps 3d content creators generate more sales. It has positive effect on overall SL economy. Whether some people like it or not.

It is known that through playing games together we bond and establish trust with other people faster. And I believe we stay in SL mainly because of friends and inventories full of virtual goods with value that we purchased through time. 

If there are no friends to meet in the social platform.. it dies. Like painful learning example we all were able to witness with SANSAR.

 

 

 

Edited by Wili Clip
  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Wili Clip said:

I am not advertising false traffic.

Yes you are.  You promote the getting of traffic by one thing so that it benefits something else in the search results. That makes it false traffic for the something else. In the scenario I described, the store hardly had any traffic. The club did though, and it was the club's traffic that was used when listing the store, because they were on the same parcel. That was false traffic when listing the store. The traffic that your fishing product produces is EXACTLY the same - false when listing the store it is attached to.

In this very thread that you started, you talked about your fishing game helping to promote brand awareness. What brand? Not the fishing game's brand on the land because that doesn't exist. You mean such things as a store's brand. You don't advertise getting fishers to the land so that they see the store and thus improve brand awareness. You advertise traffic - the thing that decides the rankings in the legacy search. You sell the means of getting traffic to one thing (fishing) to improve the search rankings of something else (stores and such). That's false traffic for the stores, that's your intention, and it breaks the search results every bit as much as traffic-bots do.

 

2 hours ago, Wili Clip said:

Now I understand why those who use bots for traffic hate me.

I don't hate you or your fishing thing. I already said that I am not against traffic manipulation. I used to do it extensively, and I haven't changed my mind about it. It became illegal so I stopped. Luckily for me, LL brought the GSA in, so I had other ways to manipulate the search results :) What I am doing is criticising you, the pot, calling the kettle black, by starting this thread.

You peddle the manipulation of traffic for improved search rankings. It's as simple as that. So don't go around criticising others who do the same things.

Edited by Phil Deakins
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Wili Clip said:

I don't know why some people here vilify me because I create games.

I don't know what you do except the fishing thing. If you feel vilified for it here, it's because you don't sell it as a game. You sell it as a way to manipulate the search rankings. Personally, I criticise (not vilify) you because you, the pot, called the kettle black, by starting this thread.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/27/2021 at 6:57 PM, Wili Clip said:

Again can you imagine what would happen with Google company (search engine division) if they just said because people are "somehow" inflating the fake visitors amount on their websites we are now going to take the visitors/traffic out of our search algorithm and make it irrelevant for search how popular the websites actually are.  

Since I only read part of the first page before posting, I thought I'd have a look back to see what was written. And I found this on the first page.

All I can say is that you have a vivid imagination. Google has no way of knowing how many visitors a website gets, so that metric cannot be a part of their algorithm. The best they can do in that respect is know how many click-throughs a webpage gets from their results pages. They do keep track of that, and produce reports for website owners. So get it right out of your head, and out of your list of arguments, that Google is capable of all manner of things like that. It isn't.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the whole idea of generating traffic to promote your business in SL is highly flawed. Unless the business is a club or something like that or maybe a new themed RP sim.  And even still, the majority of the traffic you're attracting is very narrow and might not even be the target audience you are looking for.

Honestly, I find events and promoting said events as the best way to get your brand out. I know a lot of people on the forums hate and like to diminish these events but they're laggy and full for days for a reason. It's because most people who buy things in this game like them. Assuming you are trying to sell something, I'd guess you'd want to target an audience of people who actually buy things and are looking to buy things.

Last year alone I saw a handful of relatively unknown, yet talented, creators gain clout through promotion and just by generally being associated with some of the best creators in the game. I think if you were to invest in promoting your product or business, associating yourself with one or more of these groups who do it professionally would be much more beneficial than say putting a game on your land would.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Phil Deakins said:

What I am doing is criticising you, the pot, calling the kettle black, by starting this thread.

You peddle the manipulation of traffic for improved search rankings. It's as simple as that. So don't go around criticising others who do the same things.

 

1 hour ago, Phil Deakins said:

 You sell it as a way to manipulate the search rankings. Personally, I criticise (not vilify) you because you, the pot, called the kettle black, by starting this thread.

There's no pot calling the kettle black here -- he never said increasing traffic per se is wrong -- his argument rests on whether the specific ways we increase traffic is of benefit to the community. To increase traffic with a game, an activity residents enjoy, is far superior than simply parking a bunch of bots on a region, and it's also a legal way to increase traffic.

It's irrelevant how he markets his product through his signage (which aspects of his product he chooses to focus on in his ads, the words he uses) -- this does not take away from actual RESULTS of his product (one that is far superior in terms of increasing traffic as opposed to a bunch of illegally parked bots adding nothing of value to SL).
Besides, it would be foolish of him NOT to market to his audience -- his audience wants some sort of benefit via having a fishing game on their region (increased traffic, exposure, brand image) -- their interest would most likely NOT be to spread fun games around SL in hopes this would grow SL. I mean, there might be some altruistic souls or some who are concerned with the big picture in SL, but more than likely they simply want a personal benefit. 

Edited by Luna Bliss
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Coffee Pancake said:
3 hours ago, Wili Clip said:

I am not advertising false traffic.

When you get called out on this subject by Phil of all people, it's game over.

Not for me!  I love to back pedantic people in to a corner...if I have the time and the inclination...    :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Luna Bliss said:

Not for me!  I love to back pedantic people in to a corner...if I have the time and the inclination...    :)

When you can, maybe, but this isn't one of those times ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Luna Bliss said:

There's no pot calling the kettle black here -- he never said increasing traffic per se is wrong -- his argument rests on whether the specific ways we increase traffic is of benefit to the community.

He said that one way of doing it breaks the search results, but not his way, and yet he does exactly the same thing in a different way. I've pointed that out, so he is the pot calling the kettle black.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Luna Bliss said:

It's irrelevant how he markets his product through his signage (which aspects of his product he chooses to focus on in his ads, the words he uses) -- this does not take away from actual RESULTS of his product (one that is far superior in terms of increasing traffic as opposed to a bunch of illegally parked bots adding nothing of value to SL).
 

The results of the product is the same as someone having a bunch of avs (unmanned, whether slated as bots in the legal sense, or not) parked on the sim. Most of the people that use his product, and similar products (there's a whole bunch of them, really, lol) are not at these locations to patronize the locations typical wares. They are there, solely for personal gain. That is why he advertises his product as a means for increasing traffic, because it DOES inflate traffic (most of the time it can take about an hour or so to fish a buoy, depending on things like lag, if there's an event, if there's enough funding in it, etc..). Those fisher folks are contributing to traffic in the same manner that any avatar, manned or not, would be. Not all unmanned avs are actually bots, in fact, most aren't, they're just unmanned-which is how so many places get away with using them to increase traffic.

I'm not slighting him, or his products, but a duck is a duck, whether it's white or multicolored. Unmanned avs-quite often called bots but not actually registered bots, have the same exact effect on traffic for a location as fisher folks do. Very, very few of the people using his product, the end users (not the location owners) will offer any benefit to the landowner aside from increasing traffic.

I'm pretty sure, and he'll correct me if I'm wrong, that this is what Phil is getting at. The end result is the same for both instances...increased traffic. Which is good for the landowner, but that doesn't mean one method is better or worse than the other. 25 unmanned avs standing around and 25 manned fisher folks standing around have the SAME end result. One can't seriously be breaking search without both doing that. 

 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm still waiting to hear how botrafficing is actually breaking SL search (given it's already broken how much worse could it get?)

It might be I've missed it in all the pages of posts but maybe there's an executive summary available?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Profaitchikenz Haiku said:

I'm still waiting to hear how botrafficing is actually breaking SL search (given it's already broken how much worse could it get?)

It might be I've missed it in all the pages of posts but maybe there's an executive summary available?

Summary: It skews the Traffic numbers - a metric that nerfed into uselessness in the (currently broken) web Search and absolutely useless/irrelevant in the Legacy Search system (but still included as that system is almost hard coded - so it seems - to have it as the primary sort value).

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, so it's not actually broken anything (that isn't already broken), but there's a risk that it could be misleading those of a slightly less critical-appraisal approach to what the order of things is?

 

Surely, after the tenth visit to a place where their expectations have been dashed by bottery they'll get the message and learn? If not, should we care? Is this like a sort of moral duty incumbent upon us?

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Phil Deakins said:

He said that one way of doing it breaks the search results, but not his way, and yet he does exactly the same thing in a different way. I've pointed that out, so he is the pot calling the kettle black.

It really depends on what someone is searching for in determining whether Search is broken, and to what degree, due to bots or any other traffic-enhancing means.

In Legacy Search using the Places tab, locations with greater traffic show up higher on the list and are therefore more likely to be clicked on.

So, if we're using Search in an attempt discover locations where lots of people visit (a community more likely to be available for interaction), then Search is broken for this particular purpose when people find only bots at such a place (again, referring to Legacy Search, for Places).

However if someone is searching for 'flowers' and someone's flower store shows up higher on the list due to a fishing game @ that store, then yeah, I'd say this fishing game is as responsible for breaking a search for flowers as the bots are. 'Broken' in this case being waaay down at the bottom of the list in the Places tab where you're store is unlikely to be clicked on. The question is...do people use Places to search for commercial items? I don't think so, at least not much -- most likely they use the Classified tab instead.

So his fishing game only breaks Search in severely edge-type cases (someone using Places instead of Classified to search for a commercial item). The difference between the fishing games and the bots and how they affect Search is so great it's simply not comparable -- it's not 'the pot calling the kettle black', it's 1/16th of a teaspoon of tar calling an enormous kettle black... :)

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Profaitchikenz Haiku said:

OK, so it's not actually broken anything (that isn't already broken), but there's a risk that it could be misleading those of a slightly less critical-appraisal approach to what the order of things is?

 

Surely, after the tenth visit to a place where their expectations have been dashed by bottery they'll get the message and learn? If not, should we care? Is this like a sort of moral duty incumbent upon us?

One would think/hope so. Personally .... I don't. If a user cannot be arsed to do more than look at an arbitrary number to determine a potential place to visit, that is on them.

Which is - pretty much - also a summary of my own posts/reactions in this thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Luna Bliss said:

The question is...do people use Places to search for commercial items? I don't think so, at least not much -- most likely they use the Classified tab instead.

Nearly everyone I know does indeed use search in this manner. Everyone I help find things, uses search this way. Every new person I encounter that is searching for something or asks for search assistance uses search this way as well. When I want to search something, commercially or simply to visit, I too, use search this way. I suspect there's probably a lot more of us that do than don't (those that use legacy search anyway). In fact, I don't use classified for anything and don't know anyone that does. (I know those folks exist, I just don't know them :)

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Solar Legion said:

Which is - pretty much - also a summary of my own posts/reactions in this thread.

I guess I'm with you on that then.

Oh, very creative use of colouring to match point to response. Colour me inspired.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Tari Landar said:

The results of the product is the same as someone having a bunch of avs (unmanned, whether slated as bots in the legal sense, or not) parked on the sim. Most of the people that use his product, and similar products (there's a whole bunch of them, really, lol) are not at these locations to patronize the locations typical wares. They are there, solely for personal gain. That is why he advertises his product as a means for increasing traffic, because it DOES inflate traffic (most of the time it can take about an hour or so to fish a buoy, depending on things like lag, if there's an event, if there's enough funding in it, etc..). Those fisher folks are contributing to traffic in the same manner that any avatar, manned or not, would be. Not all unmanned avs are actually bots, in fact, most aren't, they're just unmanned-which is how so many places get away with using them to increase traffic.

I'm not slighting him, or his products, but a duck is a duck, whether it's white or multicolored. Unmanned avs-quite often called bots but not actually registered bots, have the same exact effect on traffic for a location as fisher folks do. Very, very few of the people using his product, the end users (not the location owners) will offer any benefit to the landowner aside from increasing traffic.

I'm pretty sure, and he'll correct me if I'm wrong, that this is what Phil is getting at. The end result is the same for both instances...increased traffic. Which is good for the landowner, but that doesn't mean one method is better or worse than the other. 25 unmanned avs standing around and 25 manned fisher folks standing around have the SAME end result. One can't seriously be breaking search without both doing that. 

 

Quite a few do socialize at these places though, but even if these 'fishing people' aren't socializing the game is still providing far more value than bots do, as these people are earning money and/or enjoying playing the game. So this adds value to SL overall.

I have nothing against bots, and even spent some time trying to allay the fears of someone who was freaked out by them, explaining that they're just a fun toy for some. I'm only saying they are pretty useless if only used to increase traffic, and that games provide far more value overall.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Tari Landar said:

Nearly everyone I know does indeed use search in this manner. Everyone I help find things, uses search this way. Every new person I encounter that is searching for something or asks for search assistance uses search this way as well. When I want to search something, commercially or simply to visit, I too, use search this way. I suspect there's probably a lot more of us that do than don't (those that use legacy search anyway). In fact, I don't use classified for anything and don't know anyone that does. (I know those folks exist, I just don't know them :)

Much the same and such a use is one of the incredibly few use cases for Traffic as any sort of useful metric.

As stated earlier in the thread, I'll look at the Place name and Description before even so much as glancing at the Traffic - a step I only take if looking for some new place to shop.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Tari Landar said:
7 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

The question is...do people use Places to search for commercial items? I don't think so, at least not much -- most likely they use the Classified tab instead.

Nearly everyone I know does indeed use search in this manner. Everyone I help find things, uses search this way. Every new person I encounter that is searching for something or asks for search assistance uses search this way as well. When I want to search something, commercially or simply to visit, I too, use search this way. I suspect there's probably a lot more of us that do than don't (those that use legacy search anyway). In fact, I don't use classified for anything and don't know anyone that does. (I know those folks exist, I just don't know them :)

Well you know someone now  :)

Everyone I've known who wants to buy something uses Classified.

If what you say is true then I better install Wili's game on my sim...lol

* Didn't most people here on the forum say they don't use the Places tab though?

Link to post
Share on other sites
You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 67 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...