Phil Deakins

Exactly - as I said. But I think that V1s still outnumber V2s, though I may be wrong. Either way, there are still enough V1 users to make higher traffic worthwhile - imo

Imo, it's nobody else's business why the av is there. It's not doing anything to anybody. And the idea that it shouldn't be using sim resources if it's a bot is a non-starter, because it's allowed to. ARing it would be silly AND a waste of LL resources

For V2 viewers, traffic affecting rankings is history. It still counts but it counts so little that it really isn't worth bothering with. But traffic still decides the rankings in the Places tab of V1 viewers. As more and more people use V2s, its benefit gets less and less. At the moment, higher traffic is still worth having.

To be fair to the current LL employees, the Classifieds system that they inherited is a particularly bad one. When Classifieds were introduced, the search system was extremely basic; i.e. if an ad contained the exact searchterm, it got listed, regardless of its relevance to the searchterm. If not, it didn't get listed at all. In that basic system, the All tab listed in alphabetical order (ASCII order to be precise), the Places tab listed in traffic order, and the Classifieds tab listed in the order of the price paid. With other types of media, such as newspapers and phonebooks, there are no "rankings", and the price paid is for the size of the ads. which are listed in alphabetical order. And sometimes a higher price can be paid for placement. Imo, Classifieds should not be listed according to price paid, but search results don't lend themselves easily to the emulation of advertising in newspapers or phonebooks. The new idea of ranking in the Classifieds tab according to relevance is a step in the right direction, provided that price paid is a *big* part of it. I don't like the idea of someone paying a lot for a classified and being buried below a load of cheap classifieds, just because those who wrote the cheap ones accidentally or intentionally wrote text that the " dumb" search system finds to be more relevant. That just wouldn't be right. On the positive side, I'd guess that classifieds do more good for the advertisers when displayed on the normal search results pages than in the Classifieds tab, so any failings in the new Classifieds tab's system may not be too drastic. Ideally, all classifieds would be displayed according to relevance but with the price paid being a very large ranking factor. Evem more ideally, LL could start to consider major alternatives. E.g. selling classifieds at fixed prices where the advertiser can pay more for size (amount of text). Or where the advertiser can bid to be listed for specific searchterms; i.e. select one or more searchterms and bid on each one, paying the bid amount each week. The searchterm selection decides whether or not to list an ad for a search, and the bid decides its ranking/position. The second of those isn't uncommon in search engines.

You can have bots that aren't registered as such on your land too, provided that the land doesn't show in search.

suki Actor wrote: I think we should AR them. Regardless of whether stores are worth listing in search people pay good money for their adverts and when someone comes along and boosts their traffic by illegal means that is unfair. I think we should do our duty against these people and report until they are removed. Traffic doesn't make any difference to the rankings/positions of paid ads (classifieds). Traffic rankings only occur in the Places tab in V1 viewers and there are no paid ads there, so they don't compete.

Anaiya Arnold wrote: That would be bad enough, but trotting out this arrogant, high handed and insulting nonsense about "educating us" (punitively) while refusing to supply such basic and obviously necessary information, truely takes the cake. I'm not in agreement with your comment about "educating" customers. To be fair to LL, people do need to be educated to put things where they belong instead of where they don't belong and a good way to do it is to have the customer redo the listing. It's a very good way of learning. Otherwise, some people will seek to gain an advantage by listing in the wrong places. What is *really* bad is not telling people the correct places to list their delisted items. Having to redo a listing is "education" enough. For the first time, I've seen (in this thread) what a delisted message looks like. It falls short of "informing" the customer (to inform a person, you have to actually inform them - not just leave a message somewhere in case the customer comes across it). What the screen shot does show is that the message is compiled programmatically; i.e. the first part is standard and the list of delisted items is auto-written. Since the list part is auto-written, it would be an extremely trivial matter to add a semi-auto-written bit to state the correct category - select from a dropdown list of categories, for instance.

Anaiya Arnold wrote: Blaming the customers for this design failure on LL's part .... It's nothing new. In fact, it's what's expected from Linden Lab when they get something wrong. Remember the Homestead fiasco? It went like this... LL introduced Homesteads at a certain cost and tier. People asked live help (when it was manned by Lindens) if they could use a Homestead for <specific purposes>. Linden helpers said, "yes" and "that's what Homesteads are for". People buy Homesteads and use them for <specific purposes>. Linden Lab says, "We have to increase the cost and tier because "people are using them for <specific purposes>, which they were never intended for". General uproar because, after they had sold a load of Homesteads, LL turned round and blamed the users for using them for the specific purposes that they were given the go-ahead for, saying that they weren't intended to be used like that. LL refunded money to some people, but did not refund all who were caught in that trap. Some people lost a lot of money. So it's nothing new for LL to blame the customers for mistakes they make themselves.

From what I've read in these forums, Tiny Empires players don't abuse sim resources - not even when there are 15 of their alts/bots in a sim. It's down to what is considered to be abuse of sim resources, and 15 avatars in a sim isn't an abuse, imo, unless there are many other avs in the same sim.

I think I've got a very rough idea of what Tiny Empires is. Thank you folks.

Tiny Empires was mentioned in a Mainland thread concerning a load of avatars that are parked under the sea and appear to be unmanned. I've heard of Tiny Empires for years but what exactly is it? and why would avatars need to be parked out of sight?

I hope that the results of your testing aren't tainted by them expecting some user tests and excercising an unusual degree of diligence. If the tests show that items were checked properly, more tests sometime in the not too distant future, when they aren't expected, might be useful. In fact, relative frequent tests would be very useful to sellers.

Dakota Linden wrote: Hello Darrius, Linden Lab cannot fix trust issues when users are willling to accept and believe any comment without proof. It's not that people are "willing to accept and believe any comment without proof". People have learned to distrust Linden Lab over the years - and rightly so. The marketplace people are some of the recipients of distrust *because* of what Linden Lab has done to their paying customers through the years, of which there is ample proof.

Dakota Linden wrote: Hello Phil, Merchants are notified, with a message on the SLM web site. This has been stated time and time again, by me, in posts on the forum. There is also a Jira asking that emails be implemented notifying merchants when a product is unlisted. Brooke has even replied to that Jira. This question has not, and never has been, unanswered. The question remained unanswered in this thread in spite of asking it twice, one of which you, specifically, were asked. I'm sorry Dakota but leaving a message somewhere for somebody is not informing them at all. When a post is deleted in this forum, the poster is informed about it by email. Your method merely leaves a message for the seller somewhere on the off-chance that they will see it in the not too distant future. That doesn't show much in the way of consideration for the customer. For me, you don't inform people at all. You merely leave a message somewhere, in the hope that they will see it before too long. Although, LL probably isn't bothered whether or not the person sees it. If they were, they would have instituted a system to actually inform them. It's a pity that the jira you mentioned hasn't been acted on, since, imo, it's very basic for running the system - if customers actually matter, that is. I accept that the flagging test wasn't conclusive. If the person had told us which item it was, and which category it was in, it might have been conclusive. He only said that the item hadn't had any problems being in the category where it was, but that doesn't necessarily mean that it was in the correct category. Perhaps the tester will tell us. However, it only takes the result of one test to prove that the system doesn't work the way you say it works. It may work like that much or most of time but, if a single test shows otherwise, then items cannot always be checked before delisting the way you say they are. Without the details of that test item, we can't know one way or the other. You suggested that Darrius tests the wrong thing. It's not the immediacy that's in question. It's whether or not *every* delisting from flags is actually checked and verified before delisting. I can't test it but it would be interesting if some people did test it. It would show that the system actually works as it's said to work, or that people's doubts were justified.

Thank you for your post, Cudaboy. It answers a question that I've asked twice in this thread but nobody, especially Dakota, chose to answer - and one of the instances was asked of Dakota specifically. So they don't inform the seller that an item has been delisted. I'm not surprised that Dakota chose not to answer the question because the answer is not only embarassing for them but, quite frankly, it's an abominable practise on their part. The other very interesting part of your post was the experiment you did. Dakota has stated in this forum that flagged items are checked before delisting them. The truth of that has been seriously doubted because it's Linden Lab at the other end. Your test shows clearly that it is right to doubt what she stated, and to actually disbelieve it. Perhaps she isn't aware of the bad practises of the people concerned, or perhaps she merely stated the theory rather than the practise. Is it any wonder that Linden Lab has the extremely bad reputation amongst their customers that they have.

hehe - nope. But I do like Ginger Nuts

Void Singer wrote: why there? because most people have a tendency to boot bots off their land, mainly because they aren't adding anything to that persons venue and could be there for less than desirable reasons (there's no way to tell). they are spread out in remote locations in the hopes that they won't be reported or interfered with... which just makes me report them all the more =) Report them? Why? If they are not influencing a parcel's traffic count, they are doing nothing wrong so what can they be reported for?

Suella Ember wrote: McVities Jamaican Ginger Cake is better! I don't care for that. I like a more gingery taste. The McVities is ok but not a patch on a normal ginger pudding - for my taste.

Suella Ember wrote: Still, at least people have been sensible enough to avoid starting organised anti ginger drama. Why would anyone start and anti-ginger drama? I like ginger. It's my favouriote steamed pudding but then Heinz discontinued their tinned product, much to my regret

Solar Legion wrote: However, if you did visit a shop in SL, the message sent is no long "unsolicited". Mind, I'm adamant on this for the simple reason that I am sick and tired of just about every communication anyone ever sends for any reason on the net as well as in SL being called "spam" You can be as "sick and tired" as you like but visiting a place does not constitute an agreement to receive communications from the place. The word "solicited" means "asked and agreed". Unsolicited means the opposite. Walking into a place is neither asking nor is it the person agreeing. You are wrong.

Solar Legion wrote: By the by? Spam is defined as unsolicited mail/messages/calls, usually from a business. Like I said, you visited their shop .... Not spam until you ask them to cease and they continue to send. Wrong. Visiting a shop does *not* constitute permission to send communications. Sending IMs/emails solely because somebody visited a place is spam.

Ishtara Rothschild wrote: Phil Deakins wrote: You seem to want it both ways. You want to be seen as a child and, at the same time, you want to be seen as a 27 year old adult. You can't have it both ways though. If you want to be a child in SL, then you should *be* a child in SL, and accept that there are things you cannot do and places you cannot go. Why exactly can't the OP have it both ways? Nobody can expect to *be* a child in SL and be treated as though s/he isn't a child but tha's what the OP seems to want. E.g. a child avatar can't do any sexual activity in SL, even though it's an adult at the keyboard. The OP seems to want people to accept that the "child" is an adult, and she can't have that. In her initial post, she wrote... I'm the CHILD not and adult looking to seduce children! (her capitalisation) and also... Its ok for a 16 year old to be there, but not a 27 year old to be there just because of their avatar. She's a "CHILD" and she wants to be seen as a child, but she wants people to view her as a 27 year old because that's what the person at the keyboard is. She wants it both ways but she can't have that. If she plays a child, she has to accept that there are some things she can't do and some places she can't go. Incidentally, I do know that those 2 quotes were in different paragraphs and refered to different things, but it doesn't alter anything about her wanting to be seen as both a child and an adult at the same time.

You seem to want it both ways. You want to be seen as a child and, at the same time, you want to be seen as a 27 year old adult. You can't have it both ways though. If you want to be a child in SL, then you should *be* a child in SL, and accept that there are things you cannot do and places you cannot go.

Thank you for the screenshot, Peewee. The cam controls do look acceptable - in spite of the extra buttons above them, whatever they are. I suspect they are extra cam controls that have always existed but I've never used, so they'll do

I've moved store locations in the past and, to do it, I kept both stores open for a number of weeks - about a month - so that as many visitors to the old store as possible got the opportunity to see that it's closing and to take an LM to the new one. Then I closed the old store but kept a small piece of land around the landing point for a platform (the store was in the sky). On the platform, I placed LM-giving signs, stating that the store has moved. After a few more weeks, I removed the platform and signs and sold the land. The whole move took a couple of months, but there was no noticeable drop in sales. When I did it, Picks were very important for rankings and the move killed a load of valuable Picks. But you've already got rankings sorted out so that won't matter. You'll lose people who try to visit your store from their existing Picks unless they find you in search again, but that's the way it is with Picks.