Jump to content

Phil Deakins

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Phil Deakins

  1. They did that, didn't they? I'm sure that, at one time, there was an indication about the number of avatars (live popularity) on the parcel at the time of searching. I could be mistaken though.
  2. Because, for a long time, there had been an outcry from some users about traffic bots. It was to pacify some users. The same users didn't complain about camping to improve traffic counts, perhaps because many of them still earned a bit of money from camping but, for some reason, they didn't like traffic bots. Banning the gaming of traffic did nothing to help LL. If fact, it was detrimental to LL because a lot of avatars would no longer be logging in, so concurrency went down A LOT. A very significant percentage of the concurrency numbers was down to traffic bots. I alone withdrew 35+ avat
  3. @RowanMinx If the avatars you see are obviously bots, on the same parcel, and not registered as Scripted Agents, then they are not allowed. When LL banned the gaming of traffic, they said that they didn't want users to report bots. Possibly because we can't see whether or not an avatar is registered as a Scripted Agent, and we would no doubt be swamping LL with false reports. But why are obvious bots reported and nothing done? Simple answer - LL doesn't care. LL could ban or prevent 3rd party viewers from using the legacy search but, again, they don't care. LL isn't in it to be fair. They
  4. The definitive answer in no, neither camping nor money trees were ever banned. What is banned is gaming the traffic count on land that is set to show in search. That's it. Camping was almost always merely a means to have avatars on land that is set to show in search, so that the traffic count increased. It was a tool to improve search rankings so that people would go to the store/club/whatever. That was when the traffic scores dictated the rankings, as it is now in 3rd party viewers, unless the user chooses the web search. It was allowed right up until LL banned the gaming of traffic.
  5. My guess was wrong. I now understand it. Only General parcels are listed unless you are logged in, and then you can choose what to have listed. Inworld, the default is not logged in, so only General parcels are shown. It turns out that my parcel is listed after all.
  6. Correction: There's nothing wrong. It was a different mistake on my part. The search only shows General parcels unless you're logged in, in which case, the level is selectable. I'm finally understanding it, and my parcel is listed
  7. Ah. Thank you, Chic. Then there's something wrong.
  8. Am I right in thinking that only parcels that are on General Land are listed in Web Search > Places? Or are parcels on Moderate land also listed? I know that the legacy search lists everything. It's just the web search that I need to know about.
  9. I'm embarrassed. It just occurred to me that my parcel can't be in the web search because it's Moderate land, and I'm guessing that only General land can be in the web search. If my guess is correct, then the parcel being in the legacy search but not in the web search would be correct. Is my guess correct?
  10. So there's a huge difference between Basic and Premium. I don't mind that except that, in this case, they are taking money for something that they are not providing, and they've excluded submitting a ticket about it. I did as Lil suggested, so I'll see what transpires from it.
  11. Thank you Lil. I'll do that.
  12. As a non-premium user am I limited about what I can submit a ticket about? I want to submit a ticket that my parcel doesn't show in the web search, even though I've been paying 30L/week for months for it to be there. It does show in the legacy search though. But in the submit a ticket form there is no combination of drop-downs that are relevant, and it won't allow it to be submitted without the fields filled in. Or is there another way to get support? I know of another parcel that's exactly the same - legacy search, yes - web search no.
  13. LL ditched the Google Search Appliance many years ago, and moved on to a free Apache alternative - unless they've also changed from that one. Anyway... I agree with you that the web search is not producing the results that would be expected. I haven't looked at it in many years, but what I'm seeing since reading your thread is decidedly not right. Some examples:- 1. A search on my name, doesn't list me at all under People or Everything, even though I've been set to show in search since I came back around March. Or if it does list me, it's so far down the list that I didn't bo
  14. No errors on my part, sorry. If you think there are some, please point them out. Or perhaps you mean that even correcting your mistakes was an error. If that's the case, then yes, I made an error lol. You didn't understand. My teaching of the forum how to do well in search was nothing to do with traffic bots. It was after that era. It was all about the GSA. You may have benefited from my expertise back then. Didn't pay myself for my time? The money I took out went to me - to my RL bank account - so how else could I pay myself for my time? Pay it to Phil Deakins in L$
  15. @Prokofy Neva Please yourself. I was just trying to be helpful by pointing out a few mistakes that you made. I'm not going to 'get into it' with you. You are perfectly free to think what you want to think. I am sure that we all know what an advertisement actually is, so I won't pursue it. I let this ride when you posted it, but you do seem to be intent on continually stating untruths about me personally, so.... Why would I have used traffic bots if I hadn't put my store in search, eh? 😄 (A little thought before writing can be beneficial ) I was the search expert at
  16. No it's not an ad. You pay the 30L/week to be included in the search database, that's all. Unlike an ad, you are not paying for it to be seen, so it's not an ad. You can think of it as an advertisement if you like, but it's not. Nope. When you check to be in search, there is no option to choose Places. There is an option to choose Rentals though. In other words, you can't choose Places, which is what I said. See above. That's irrelevant. From post #1 (my bolding):- The rest of your post isn't worthy of any reply, so I w
  17. @Prokofy Neva 1. The 30L/week is not an ad. It is a fee to be included in search, but it's not an advertisement, and is not treated as one. 2. You can't pay the 30L weekly fee to be seen in Places, because Places isn't an option. Rentals is an option, but not Places. 3. You can't pay to be seen in search when a particular phrase is searched on. We are not offered that option. Those are 3 mistakes that I found in your first 2 posts. You seem to have expectations that aren't offered. After that I saw that the thread is full of equally long posts by you, so I didn't read them.
  18. That's what my first alt cost me (about Jan/Feb 2007), but I never had to pay for an alt after that - and I have a few
  19. 1. No. 2. No. The 5 account rule goes back to soon after the beginning of time, but LL doesn't enforce it, and has never enforced it since I joined at the end of 2006. What may be programmatically enforced is 5 accounts per email address. I've no idea if you can have 5 accounts using the same email address but, if you can, I would guess that the enforcement of that is programmed.
  20. @KT Kingsley @Liramaril I've tested it with:- av #1 in Singularity, and the snapshot notifications turned ON av #2 in Alchemy taking the snapshots I found that when the snapshot taker (av #2) has 'Quiet Snapshots to Disk' turned on (under the Advanced menu in Alchemy), the taking of a snapshot is NOT notified to avatar #1. But with 'Quiet Snapshot to Disk' turned off, the snapshots are notified to av #1. I'm not going to tests with all combinations of viewers, of course, so the best thing to do is test it with whatever viewer you use. Liramaril. If it bothers you, find
  21. I've managed to stop it with help from someone in the Alchemy group. I had to do it in Debug though, but I definitely didn't set it there. It's weird - but it's stopped now.
  22. I don't see any point to it either @Scylla Rhiadra. I want to turn it off now, but I still can't find it in Alchemy, although I definitely saw it yesterday and turned it on. I remember that lol.
  23. Found it. It's in Singularity. In the Vanity>Main tab - "Announce when someone takes a snapshot". I've tested it and the avatar is informed when someone, who is in the same sim, takes a snapshot. It's nothing to do with what the snapshot is of. So it's not when they take a snapshot of me. Singularity also has the "Quiet snapshots to disk" option, but in Prefs, not under the Advanced menu. ETA: It seems that Alchemy also has it, but I haven't been able to find it. I did find it yesterday because I have it turned on. I know that because I'm now being told when someone takes
  24. I have that in Alchemy's Advanced menu. It doesn't sound like it will inform me when someone takes a snapshot though. It sounds like it's about me taking snapshots.
  25. I had that happen yesterday - twice. I've been trying different viewers in the last 2 days, and yesterday I settled on Alchemy. The day before, I settled on Singularity. With both of them, I went through some Preferences, and I noticed one that opted to inform me when someone takes a snapshot. I selected it for some reason. Then yesterday it happened twice. I was informed in local chat that <name> had taken a snapshot. My radar showed that he hadn't been anywhere near me and I wondered why I was getting notified that he'd taken snapshots. Only now, when I read this thread did it occ
  • Create New...