« A Bunny Licensed in 5 States, Linden G-Men, and M Linden's Supply 'N Demand Comedy Hour | Main | The Gift of the Metarati »

08/06/2008

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Prokofy Neva

The link to the Fast Company article is here:
http://www.fastcompany.com/articles/2008/08/interview-philip-rosedale.html

I imagine if I was trying to debate this with Jack, he would say that in fact my plan for the "rule of law" wouldn't be a self-executing constitution, but would require so much additional judicial discretion that it would wind up being "rule by laws".

Well, no. It needs law, and law needs spine. Everybody knows what an intrusive ad tower is. It's only Ancient Shriner and Chrischun Fassbinder who troll Linden office hours and make it seemingly hard to define (their rejoicing in the comments sounds like a warning that we can't expect much change).

One insidious argument that Chrischun makes -- and then Jack trails behind with it -- is that if an area is already "commercial" then ad farms "fit".

But...they don't. The first task in dealing with ad farming is to completely separate it from any notion of "commercial".

There is nothing "commercial" about these ads.

1) They are there to extort back the view -- to sell land, not sell ads.

2) So often, they advertise ad space, but have no ads on the towers, only the ads for ad space. That tells you that they are desperate, and merely viewjackers.

3) They advertise scamming websites with trojans and whatnot outside of SL, not SL business -- that really is a disservice, forcing people to deal with malware sites like for "adult friends".

4) They hijack other people's eyeballs, planting themselves next to other people's clubs or stores to parasite from their traffic.

5) The overwhelming majority of people owning clubs and malls and stores do not use ad towers -- they don't need to. People find them in search or classifieds or picks, not by flying into a giant tower like an insect slamming into a windshield. There really is a terribly vast fiction here saying ad towers are related to "commerce". They aren't.

6) Ad space *is* needed. But it need not be spammy, intrusive, devaluing. It doesn't belong on pristine waterfront, forests, PG mountain sides, idyllic cobblestone pathways. Only when people ask for it, rent out to it, or agree to have it next to their land on their sim should it be permitted.

7) The Lindens could fix all this by banning all ads by people who do not own X number of meters on a sim already (512, let's say) forcing ad farmers to have to buy on every sim where they try to deploy 16 m2 -- or get out. This isn't a 100 percent solution -- nothing is. But Jack needs to get his head out of edge cases and look at the majority's needs here.

Once the Lindens bite the bullet and start selling ad space for themselves, their determination to outlaw other extortionist and intrusive ad farming will increase -- so we have to help them to that realization sooner rather than later. Their controlled ads along roadsides in nicer looking prims without porn and without spinning and particles would be a welcome addition.

Dirk Talamasca

+50 points for use of a new word "terrariumness". Score!

Ciaran Laval

I fear that the Linden's won't be selling advertising space, that they'd rather a third party carried out that task, the Linden's will sell the zoned ad land, TAG would be very interested in running that service for them, hence the happy little post in Jack's thread from Ancient Shriner.

Zoning existing mainland should not be done unless 100% of the landowners agree to it.

16M plots should not be allowed to be set for sale for anything more than L$0, heck anything under 512M shouldn't be set for sale for anything other than L$0. Whereas there are legitimate uses for 16M plots, selling them as individual parcels really isn't one of them.

Finally yes, the existing terms of service can be used to deal with a lot of the ad farming and plot grieifing issues. A 16M plot set for sale for L$9999, complete with ban lines is there to grief the neighbours, that can be dealt with via the terms of service.

Prokofy Neva

Ciaran,

A great hobble to progress is the idea that 100 percent of the landowners must agree to zoning.

You are making an irrational, reactionary statement based on your own particular situation.

Try to come up out of that trench, and see that if the Lindens refuse to move on ad farms, as they are refusing to move, and will not address this situation separately, we are left with only one thing: lobbying to get them to remove them at least from areas we can try to convince them should be designated as zoned residential, so that we can stop the destruction of land value.

Sure, there are many mixed cases. sure, there are people who won't agree. But please STOP trying to get in the way of people who DO agree. If you put it to "100 percent of the land owners" in a situation like that, well, DUH, an ad farmer with 16 m2 could hold up the entire sim. So *stop hobbling and crippling progress* on this issue with tekkie absolutism.

And another issue, that plagues many of us: Why should club thieves get to keep hogging the entire FPS and avatar slot usage for that sim from their tiny 4096 or even 8192, crippling the usage for everyone else on that sim? It's insane.

The TOS -- or rather the May 2008 policy that interprets the TOS to include extortion as griefing/disturbance of the peace is sufficient, yet the Lindens have not acted on it for months. They STOPPED enforcing this. That lets us know that we can't expect an awful lot from that route. What's going to change to make them START? And these assholes just take the price tag off and leave even uglier signs up -- there are no consequences to these ARs, even repeated, even for months. The Lindens can't seem to bite the bullet and deal with the dozen or so really worst offenders and get them off the grid.

I made a proposal on the JIRA to set up code so that nothing under 512 can be sold except for $0. That really truly does take care of all those "edge cases" like ummmm Weedy Herbst's "private use" of her and Dave's 16 m2 empire and all the other little anal-retentive script kiddies who insist on doing their "science" on other people's sims.

But you'd be amazed how some of the JIRA extremists kept insisting that they'd be incredibly harmed by having to set a piece of land to $0. It truly is extraordinary to see the lengths of outright blatant bullshit people will mount on a thing like this just to be belligerent.

Please go and vote for this Ciaran, and try to battle the idiots on there, because all it takes is Harleen or one of these other JIRA-dist regular annoyances and the Lindens lose resolve:

http://jira.secondlife.com/browse/MISC-864

Note: a Linden has said there is NO TECHNICAL REASON that it can't be done. If you can sell first land for $512 only to newbies once, you can set the same sort of flags to make sure anything less than 512 can't sell for anything for $0.

All these fake edge cases can be resolved by gentleman's agreements; there aren't that many of them.

Note that these assholes even CLOSED this JIRA even though it is a) a reasonable solution for ad farms that curbs at least a good deal of them, even if not 100 percent b) is technically feasible. The three people in this thread constantly obstracting it are the usual suspects and just making up shit to try to be annoying.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)