In order to put an end to the practice of falsely inflating traffic figures on land parcels through the use of camping and bots, the Lindens should: o make it a TOS offense to inflate traffic figures through artificial means such as camping and bots, and accept abuse reports on that basis o punish such an offense by removal of that parcel found guilty of traffic inflation from the ability to appear in search with those traffic results. I'm not sure that the Lindens have the surgical ability to either override search ads checked off for $30 in such cases, or to override the existing system collecting and displaying all traffic results as the chief means to sort in both search/places and as a component of search/all – but I see no reason why this couldn't work. Basically, the area where this issue occurs to irritate people the most is in search/places. The Lindens have already tweaked search/all with other kinds of indicators for usage such that sheer traffic, as infused by bots, is not sufficient to force a parcel up to the top of the list. Search/places exists only if the user checks of the parcel box to include it in SEARCH for $30 a week. I offer this solution to avoid the more draconian and destructive solution of removing traffic as a factor for search/places entirely. That is too blunt an axe, as it cuts out the overwhelming majority of parcels that do NOT use bots or camping and have MERITED traffic. Search/Places ordered by traffic results = most sales in SL. Word of mouth and classifieds only account for some sales, for some users, usually older, and more niche-orienetd. The Lindens should not destroy the engine of the economy that is contained in search/place + traffic = most sales by obliterating free media – traffic results – in a free economy – consumers making free and informed choices. If the punishment for using boxes of 50 bots on your land was removal from search, I think within a week or two, we'd see a drastic change in the landscape. The Lindens will not have to spend long in serial administrative decisions related to AR report s on this matter; within a month, the deterrent effect of having your land removed from search if you use bots will be powerful. If those so irritated by bots as traffic infusers could channel their angst through ARs and have the have an effect of removing the parcel completely from view, we will see the use of bots in this fashion begin to ebb. Already, they are not anywhere near the problem in the results of search/places that people imagine, since the removal of Popular Places. Such a policy is consistent with the practices of such sites as technorati.com which will remove from its database of sites those sites that use gimmicks like link-farming or click-farming.