We know just how well Linden Lab are doing at enforcing the no camping/no traffic bots rule, right?

/end bullshit.

Anyway, as a fine example of what I was saying just the other day, check this out!

I went to a store earlier on but I noticed I landed on the sim next to the one I had teleported to. And the store definitely did not have the traffic it showed in search. I worked out that the estate landing point was set to the store I had landed at, but the search teleport landing point was on the next sim along… on a parcel inhabited by campers and bots. See, this way people do not see the bots when they are in the store, nor do they notice all the dots on the map in the store and the store owner still gets to game the traffic. So I went to have a nosey.

Now, I’m not one for naming and all that crap, but this pisses me off. So I am doing. It was the  Harbinger & Stormie Designs store on a region called Haunted Visions. Well… the bots are there but if you try to teleport you will land on the sim next door.

In one box 500 or so metres up, they have space for 16 campers, (paying L$1 per 15 mins…does it not cost more than that to power your computer)? And in a box at the side of that they have 10 traffic bots. I make that 26 avatars there just to game the traffic. And traffic on that parcel is over 44000.

We're not gaming traffic, we're ummm.... here to play Bingo!

I wonder if those guys are related?

Now, let me explain why this pisses me off so much. There is a reason camping and bots were banned and it was because they ridicule and make a mockery of the traffic system. It means new designers starting out have to game the system to even stand a chance. So it isn’t the best quality places that make it up the rankings… it’s the places with the most bots. It’s entirely unfair. I’m not a designer myself, so frankly it makes little difference to me personally. But I know plenty of people who are negatively affected by this and who, on principal, would not game the system regardless of their “competitors,” doing it. So when Linden Lab banned traffic gaming altogether and then went on to clarify that this include both traffic bots AND campers, I was thrilled. Little did I know that Linden Lab would do such a terrible job of keeping on top of it.

The fact is that any store that now deliberately goes out to game the traffic like this is being not only unfair, but also malicious. If your items are not good enough that you are able to build up a successful clientele off the back of their quality, then that’s your problem.

I would AR it, but what good would it do? Linden Lab do not want ARs on this issue. They’re “dealing with it,” by monitoring search results routinely. Beats me how they can miss 44k traffic and a lot of green dots. Someone needs to take a second look.

/end rant.

Jack Linden made a post on the official Second Life blog yesterday about changes to the traffic scoring.

You can read that post by clicking here.

But here is my question. WHAT’S THE POINT?! However you calculate it, while people are still abusing bots and campers (despite a change in the Terms of Service to supposedly prevent that from happening) the traffic score is about as useful as a blind air traffic controller.

Which brings me to my bitching and ranting session. WHY ARE THEY NOT ENFORCING THESE NEW RULES? What’s the point in telling us all bots and campers are banned and then doing nothing to enforce it? It’s like world governments saying ‘murder is wrong…. but go ahead anyway. Just remember that is isn’t a nice thing to do.’

Allow me to quote Jack Linden (from his post back in April 2009, which you can read by clicking here).

“Almost everyone agrees that using Bots to manipulate traffic (and therefore Search rankings) is unfair. Not only with respect to Search itself but also due to the load on Mainland Region resources and how that can impact other Residents in the area.

Therefore we are setting policy that attempting to gain an unfair Search advantage, by the use of Bots to inflate the Traffic for a parcel, will be considered a violation. This policy applies to both Mainland and Private Estates as both are represented in Search.”

Almost a month later, in May 2009, he made this post in which he offered further clarification on the rules. he stated that camping was also deemed “gaming traffic,” and as such, was also prohibited. However, the Lindens, as stated in the April post, do not want residents policing this and sending in Abuse Reports. Of course they don’t! That would mean they would actually have to pretend to be doing something to enforce it. Instead they claimed they would routinely monitor Search for what might be overly inflated traffic stats.

Let me start by saying they are doing a shit job at that. Frankly. I just ran a search myself for a very common term, “skin.” And whaddya know….

Gee... Those look just like traffic figures that occur without the use of bots.

Of course, my instant reaction was that pretty much all the visible ones on there were probably gaming traffic in some way. But you know me… I hate to pass judgement (/end bullshit) and so I thought I would at least go and have a look for myself at a few of them before calling them all names and inserting some offensive language.

Now while there were some high scoring places who have achieved this by simply having Bloodlines clans and the like all gather, there were some who were definitely in breach of the policy. The policy states that those who use models for clothing in their stores, run as bots are exempt. Does this count if one person on a quarter sim store is running 65 ‘models?’ There needs to be some clarity. This is blatant gaming!! How about actually making people parcel off the separate 16sqm plot (so traffic will be scored separately) for every single ‘model’? There was talk of that but nothing seems to have come from it. And it’s all good and well Jack Linden saying that ‘eventually’ store owners will have to declare their models to Linden Lab and the model’s traffic won’t count. But when is ‘eventually?’ Is that the same eventually as ‘eventually 100000 will be able to be online simultaneously without crashes?’ In which case, don’t hold your breath, folks. And as if people will even declare their models.

And amongst those I visited, some were still holding out with the traditional means of camping, now clearly and categorically banned.

But will Linden Lab do anything about it?

I really had a high amount of priase for Linden Lab after they took the step to ban bots and camping for traffic gaming. I thought it was a big move and one in the right direction. I even left a comment to that effect on the original post back in April 2009. But the fact is that traffic in Second Life is still worthless because Linden Lab, quite frankly, will not enforce it. Yes, I can appreciate that it is a time consuming effort to monitor bot usage. So surely a harsher ‘punishment’ for those who are found to be doing it would be in place in order to attempt to reduce it. Anyone, in my opinion, caught traffic gaming in Second Life should have their parcel’s traffic statistics returned to zero for a month. And if the Lindens cannot cope or manage with dealing with campers and searching for breaches of this policy, then they need to open up to Second Life residents and enable an option for reporting traffic gaming on the Abuse Report and allow residents to tip them off.

Ok, so we don’t like playing the school tell-tale. But I personally hate traffic in Second Life and only because of those who game it in this way. It means that people don’t realistically have a chance unless they play these games. It’s hideously unfair and the fact that so many people do it, means that so many others feel they have to in order to compete.

So congratulations on the policy, Linden Lab. Now, how about actually enforcing it? ma2g3upc96