If everyone is happy, how can it be a bad thing?

[Qie Niangao]

2 hours ago, Ingrid Ingersoll said:

But you said micro parcels are amazing. And everybody loves them. 

Must be so. Already in 2008 the locals would surround the cherished micro parcels with signs begging that the ads be protected from harassment: "STOP ANNOYING AD FARMS". It really would be such a shame to taunt an adfarm.

[Alwin Alcott]

58 minutes ago, Qie Niangao said:

Must be so. Already in 2008 the locals would surround the cherished micro parcels with signs begging that the ads be protected from harassment: "STOP ANNOYING AD FARMS". It really would be such a shame to taunt an adfarm.

Linden Lab Official:Policy on ad farms and network advertisers - Second Life Wiki

[Coffee Pancake]

22 hours ago, BilliJo Aldrin said:

I had a similar experience in Oklahoma a few years ago, only i was cursing and shaking my fist at every wind turbine I was forced to see.

and thus we get to the real reason this thread exists .. muh politics

[Rowan Amore]

1 hour ago, Coffee Pancake said:

and thus we get to the real reason this thread exists .. muh politics

Sometimes, just a peek at someone's profile will tell you all you need to know.  

[BilliJo Aldrin]

14 hours ago, Alwin Alcott said:

to the first : freedom on mainland doesn't mean people can't dislike activities like yours.
to the second.. we'r not on a interstate, but in SL.

but i hope you feel good now we discussed this subject again, with the same old outcome.
See you next time! 

 

Its second life, everyone is free to dislike whatever they want to dislike.

However when I find something I dislike, I don't suggest that Linden Lab changes the rules so that the thing I dislike is no longer allowed

[Love Zhaoying]

1 hour ago, Coffee Pancake said:

and thus we get to the real reason this thread exists .. muh politics

Hey now, evurbody knows wind turbines cause cancer.

[BilliJo Aldrin]

12 hours ago, Katherine Heartsong said:

My only issue with 16m parcels, that you say you carved out of what was already a tiny one is this ... What do you as a seller expect them to be used for?

I know you know exactly what the vast majority of them are for (garish signs) and by selling them you're knowingly contributing to the blight of these things on the mainland.

I get the theory of capitalism (sort of), what I don't get is people's naivety and lack of ethics. Selling a 16m parcel? Just not cool in my books. But it's SL, you do you.

I'm not selling a 16 sq m parcel, I'm selling an 80 sq m parcel. Perhaps another land owner on the sim will buy it for the extra prims.

Or maybe another advertiser will buy it, cut out 16 sq m for his sign, and abandon the rest. Once they buy it, its out of my control

Edited April 26, 2023 by BilliJo Aldrin
changed a word

[BilliJo Aldrin]

5 hours ago, Alwin Alcott said:

Linden Lab Official:Policy on ad farms and network advertisers - Second Life Wiki

Thank you for posting that Alwin. It gave me a chance to reread it.

This part is very interesting:

---------

For the purposes of this document, "ad farm" means advertising or content intended solely to drive an unreasonable price for the land parcel it is on, usually by spoiling the nearby visual environment for others. Advertisements themselves are not prohibited; Legitimate advertising or using small parcels for promoting events or stores is allowed. But when advertising crosses the line into harassing behavior or "visual spam," and the intent is purely to compel another Resident to pay an unreasonable price to restore their view, it violates the harassment policy in the Community Standards

---------

So, if I had a big ugly eyesore sign on a parcel that was for sale, that would be ad farming and against the rules.

None of my ad parcels are for sale, so I'm not ad farming. I'm advertising my second life business endeavours, which is acceptable.

As I said before, if I ever do sell one of my 16 sq m parcels, I remove the ad and sell the parcel empty

Edited April 26, 2023 by BilliJo Aldrin

[Rowan Amore]

I often wonder if people putting up those tiny ad.parcels for their business ventures realize that most savvy SL residents would actually avoid that business venture.  Personally, I'd think it would only attract the clueless.  Or maybe that's the point?

[SabrinaCooke]

1 hour ago, Rowan Amore said:

I often wonder if people putting up those tiny ad.parcels for their business ventures realize that most savvy SL residents would actually avoid that business venture.  Personally, I'd think it would only attract the clueless.  Or maybe that's the point?

Agreed. I usually give those businesses a wide berth, anyway, because many seem to be of questionable quality, judging by their ad layouts/images. Plus, I'm not sure ads along the highways are all that effective, considering I've experienced driving on the routes for hours and hardly ever encountering other people on the road. Usually the only other vehicles I encounter are empty Yava pods. 

SL businesses are probably better served by buying banner space on Seraphim or the like.

[diamond Marchant]

2 hours ago, Rowan Amore said:

I often wonder if people putting up those tiny ad.parcels for their business ventures realize that most savvy SL residents would actually avoid that business venture.  Personally, I'd think it would only attract the clueless.  Or maybe that's the point?

Yes! No data on this, but I have always assumed that roadside ads in virtual worlds are ineffective or counter productive because of limited road traffic, the fact that they annoy people, and alternatives such as search. They serve mainly to amuse trolls. 

[BilliJo Aldrin]

Perhaps one of you would like to start a thread discussing the effectiveness of roadside advertising.

My point was that all  land sales are only the business of the people involved in the land sale.

I agree totally that ad farms are bad, and should be reported, but networked advertising is permitted as long as the rules for the advertising are obeyed.

I look forward to your new thread.

 

Edited April 26, 2023 by BilliJo Aldrin
changed a word

[Nukasa22]

5 minutes ago, BilliJo Aldrin said:

but networked advertising is permitted

I agree that if anything rules on micro cutting in regards of ads should be tightened.

It's not only the fact that a 16m² parcel can ruin 1600m² too easily. It's also that micro ad parcels profit from their surroundings without paying a dime to those. Example are ad farms appearing around busier places like GTFO hubs. It's nothing but blood sucking on people who have actually done something useful, living off of them like parasites while contributing nothing, on the contrary. Since you seem to enjoy RL comparisons, you think IRL you can just plant an ad farm next to a popular place and pay an as low rent as on the level of a 16m² in comparison? I don't think so.

[BilliJo Aldrin]

1 hour ago, Nukasa22 said:

I agree that if anything rules on micro cutting in regards of ads should be tightened.

It's not only the fact that a 16m² parcel can ruin 1600m² too easily. It's also that micro ad parcels profit from their surroundings without paying a dime to those. Example are ad farms appearing around busier places like GTFO hubs. It's nothing but blood sucking on people who have actually done something useful, living off of them like parasites while contributing nothing, on the contrary. Since you seem to enjoy RL comparisons, you think IRL you can just plant an ad farm next to a popular place and pay an as low rent as on the level of a 16m² in comparison? I don't think so.

You (and others) are railing on about ad farms, but the transaction I described had nothing to do with ad farming. So I would say this thread has gone completely off topic, and I suggest a mod close it.

I look forward to your thread about the evils of ad farms.

[Rowan Amore]

On 4/23/2023 at 6:43 AM, BilliJo Aldrin said:

So whats is the problem?

Discussing ads on micro parcels is on topic as you asked us a question.  We're just giving you our answers to that question.

[BilliJo Aldrin]

7 minutes ago, Rowan Amore said:

Discussing ads on micro parcels is on topic as you asked us a question.  We're just giving you our answers to that question.

I'm pretty sure my initial question was why do people think they can force everyone to live their sl lives the way the way others think they should, and then attempt to get LL to change the rules to satisfy them.

Linden Lab seems to be perfectly happy with the rules on networked advertising and so am I.

LL allows networked advertising, and until LL bans them, mine will stay.

 

Edited April 26, 2023 by BilliJo Aldrin
It's Lab, not Labs, added a line

[BilliJo Aldrin]

If LL does change the rules on networked advertising, lets hope this time they publish the rule change on the front page of the Second Life website, and not just update the Wiki like last time.

Like seriously, who reads the Wiki every single day to see if they changed a rule?

[Rowan Amore]

6 minutes ago, BilliJo Aldrin said:

I'm pretty sure my initial question was why do people think they can force everyone to live their sl lives the way the way others think they should, and then attempt to get LL to change the rules to satisfy them.

Linden Lab seems to be perfectly happy with the rules on networked advertising and so am I.

LL allows networked advertising, and until LL bans them, mine will stay.

 

Actually, your first question followed your description paragraph on how you sliced up a small parcel into an even smaller parcel then asked, "So what's the problem?".   

The rest of the post was your answer to that question.  As I said, we're just giving ours.

Come to think of it, the title of the thread was your first question which would even better explain our answers which are totally on topic.

[BilliJo Aldrin]

1 minute ago, Rowan Amore said:

Actually, your first question followed your description paragraph on how you sliced up a small parcel into an even smaller parcel then asked, "So what's the problem?".   

The rest of the post was your answer to that question.  As I said, we're just giving ours.

Come to think of it, the title of the thread was your first question which would even better explain our answers which are totally on topic.

Actually the "everyone"  in the topic referred to everyone involved in the transaction, not every single person in Second life.

I apologize for not being more clear as to what "everyone" referred to.

This thread has become nothing more than sniping back and forth, so again, I respectfully request a mod to close it, since anything useful had already been been distilled out of it.

[Rowan Amore]

And there in lies the problem.  You're happy, the seller is happy, the next buyer is happy so the rest of SL residents on the region be damned.  Understood.

Yes, I do agree.  This thread has more than run it's course and given us a clear picture so thank you.

[Cinnamon Mistwood]

 The title:   If everyone is happy, how can it be a bad thing?

Not everyone is happy.  I know you amended your argument a few posts in to say that really only the seller and buyer matter and everyone else in the region can suck it.  Way to move the goal posts.  "Everyone" is just 2 people now.

You knew that when you started this thread, so I am not sure what you were expecting when you made it.  Let's change the title.  

If not everyone is happy, how can it be a good thing?  It is not a win-win situation and never was.

 

[Persephone Emerald]

When one owns mainland they can do pretty much whatever they want with it (with a few exceptions). This is both the beauty and the horror of mainland. Someone could decide to grow a field of pen.ises that poof daisies right next to your mansion, and all you could do is either derender every pen.is plant, try to sell your now unattractive parcel, or abandon it to move someplace else.

At least ad objects would be easier to derender than a field of pen.ises.

[Love Zhaoying]

5 hours ago, Rowan Amore said:

Discussing ads on micro parcels is on topic as you asked us a question.  We're just giving you our answers to that question.

You're not supposed to disagree!!1!!1!

[Love Zhaoying]

4 hours ago, BilliJo Aldrin said:

so again, I respectfully request a mod to close it, since anything useful had already been been distilled out of it.

You have to actually "report the thread".  Merely posting "I respectfully request a mod to close it" does not have any effect.

 

[Qie Niangao]

16 hours ago, BilliJo Aldrin said:

Thank you for posting that Alwin. It gave me a chance to reread it.

This part is very interesting:

---------

For the purposes of this document, "ad farm" means advertising or content intended solely to drive an unreasonable price for the land parcel it is on, usually by spoiling the nearby visual environment for others. Advertisements themselves are not prohibited; Legitimate advertising or using small parcels for promoting events or stores is allowed. But when advertising crosses the line into harassing behavior or "visual spam," and the intent is purely to compel another Resident to pay an unreasonable price to restore their view, it violates the harassment policy in the Community Standards

---------

So, if I had a big ugly eyesore sign on a parcel that was for sale, that would be ad farming and against the rules.

None of my ad parcels are for sale, so I'm not ad farming. I'm advertising my second life business endeavours, which is acceptable.

As I said before, if I ever do sell one of my 16 sq m parcels, I remove the ad and sell the parcel empty

The adfarm policy is certainly not limited to advertising land set for sale. It's mostly about the ads themselves, including this:

Quote

All advertisers must make a reasonable attempt to fit in with the local area and to respect the wishes of Residents living nearby wherever possible. Linden Lab can and will, at its sole discretion, ask you to remove or modify unacceptable advertising-related content.

This means that the "must comply" requirements are the bare minimum. Here the Lab is further expressing its intent to remove any advertising content it pleases, especially if that's also what the neighbors want.

Discussions around the land-cutting policy went further, with measures to include moving newly-formed microparcels to dedicated regions containing tightly-packed microparcels exclusively. This is one of the "other options" that was on the plate when this was written:

Quote

What about land cutting?
There is no doubt that this is also a problem. If the removal of ad farms doesn't substantially reduce land cutting, we will look at other options.

Every time a microparcel is created, it's more evidence that mere removal of ad farms hasn't solved the land cutting problem.