DOUBLE PURCHASE UNREASONABLY DIFFICULT TO AVOID

[Lyle Pelazzi]

I always double purchase items, you could call it careless on my part, but really its as easy as hitting the back button to browse around. I do it a lot, and usually never ask for a refund. I see people double purchase all my items all the time, and i refund it. I dont understand why this isnt fixed. Sure people are careless, but its really ridiculous that it adds +1 to quantity, when that should be added manually.....

[Paul Hexem]

Basic browsing in online stores is to never use the Back button.

Open links of interest in new tabs- then you don't lose your browsing spot, and don't need to use the Back button.

[Czari Zenovka]

---

Lyle Pelazzi wrote:

I always double purchase items, you could call it careless on my part, but really its as easy as hitting the back button to browse around. I do it a lot, and usually never ask for a refund. I see people double purchase all my items all the time, and i refund it. I dont understand why this isnt fixed. Sure people are careless, but its really ridiculous that it adds +1 to quantity, when that should be added manually.....

---

I sell a particular item that for some reason used to be double (or triple!) purchased a lot in the past.  It is a copyable item and I put the permissions in bold letters within the item description after it was multiple-purchased a few times to attemtp to bring people's attention to it.  I never had anyone ask for a refund but, like you, I would contact the person and refund the money.  After awhile I was losing money because I refunded the total purchase price while commission was taken out on my end so I stated in the description of that item that I could not refund multiple purchases and included a "tutorial" of sorts on how to purchase on the MP.  After about a year of no more double purchases, I took it out.  I found it interesting that, until I posted the "no refund policy" I had regular multiple purchases of the item, then after posting...none.

A number of the people to whom I refunded money seemed embarrassed and said words to the effect of what you stated - "...you could call it careless on my part..."  While I am critical of LL and the MP on many points, I do not think it is LL's responsibility to code a system to save a person from herself.

 

[Kampu Oyen]

---

Lyle Pelazzi wrote:

 I dont understand why this isnt fixed.

---

The simplest explanation for why something easy to fix never gets fixed is that the existence of the problem, itself, is a solution or part of a solution for someone else's problem.

That is: someone at Linden Labs wants you to be frustrated, and to complain, and to see nothing done about your complaint.

 

[Betty Briand]

yeh it happens manually, usually to me when pressing the buy option  .. then thinking nah, hitting back button n all ..than a few days later buying something for real and checking out so quick, seeing that old item there in the cart too late ..

if it was the same item, shooting the seller an IM doesnt hurt.. refunding is in order, especially if it is a copy item.

no matter what you experience, never stop to give refunds yourself, it is the right thing to do, mhm

[Amethyst Jetaime]

It may be carelessness that put more than one item in your shopping cart but it is irresponsiblity that is the reason you are charged for both items you bought.  It is your responsibility to check your order over before you hit checkout and correct it if you need to. That is why you are shown the order before you hit the check out button and again before you complete the transaction and hit the place order button. 

Sellers are under no obligation to refund money for this especially if they have a no refund policy.   If the items are copy then there is no harm in asking poltely for a refund, but don't expect fhe full amount back.  Expect your money back minus the commission that LL charged the merchant. because it is definitely not fair that the merchant has to pay for your error.

[Sassy Romano]

This is why I prefer people to buy inworld, our vendors check their purchase history and if they've already bought the item ever before, they are auto refunded.

 

If the system can be coded to reduce mistakes, it's my view that it should be.

[Kampu Oyen]

---

Sassy Romano wrote:

This is why I prefer people to buy inworld, our vendors check their purchase history and if they've already bought the item ever before, they are auto refunded.

 

If the system can be coded to reduce mistakes, it's my view that it should be.

---

That you will prefer to buy in-world is the whole reason this problem exists in the first place. I have tested it and it definitely is not explicable solely by user carelessness. This and many other things are clearly intended to push people back in-world where they are hoped to inflate the demand for land by merchants.

 

[Czari Zenovka]

---

Kampu Oyen wrote:

---

Sassy Romano wrote:

This is why I prefer people to buy inworld, our vendors check their purchase history and if they've already bought the item ever before, they are auto refunded.

 

If the system can be coded to reduce mistakes, it's my view that it should be.

---

That you will prefer to buy in-world is the whole reason this problem exists in the first place. I have tested it and it definitely is not explicable solely by user carelessness. This and many other things are clearly intended to push people back in-world where they are hoped to inflate the demand for land by merchants.

 

---

Maybe, maybe not.  I'm not debating odd things have been happening in the MP but, again taking the item that was regularly multiple-purchased in my store, I find a few things odd that I can't totally pin on MP weirdness:

*Many of the people I contacted to refund the multiple-purchase money said the following or variations thereof:

--"I was too embarrassed to contact you because it was my fault."

--"I didn't think the order went through, so I ordered it again. (In my transactions records I saw the space of time between the two orders was less than a minute.)

--"I was in a hurry and clicked twice before I realized it."

Keep in mind that I never asked anyone for an explanation; I contacted the customers, said that my transaction history showed they purchased more than one of a copyable item and I was refunding their money for the duplicates.  The people responded to my IM and either said, "Oh thank you" or one of the above statements.

*The multiple purchases were only on one out of 60-odd items.  It was the same item multiple-purchased, not even two of my items; always the same one.  That in itself is odd and I suppose one could come up with a conspiracy theory on that.  I admit that is strange - except - this particular item is the type that one *would* normally use more than one of in a home.

*Here is the one I find particularly interesting - I was getting multiple purchases on this item at least once a week, if not more often.  This is despite putting "THIS ITEM HAS COPY PERMISSIONS" at the top of the description in capital letters.  When I made the decision after about a year that I could no longer keep refunding the full purchase price of an item when I was paying the MP commission, I placed a statement at the bottom of the item description stating I could not refund multiple purchases.  The multiple purchases stopped immediately.  I did not have another instance for a year, so I took out that disclaimer and to this day I have not had another multiple purchase.

Not ragging on you, Kampu...just relating my personal "oddities" on the MP.

 

[Kampu Oyen]

For certain at least some of the duplicates are clumsiness, yes.

Customers have told me so.

But there are other things that cause an item to seem to be ordered twice, which you can try for yourself.

For example, if an item is deleted from a Magic Box (either by you or by Malefactor Linden) but the synch with the SLM hasn't been updated (that is, hasn't completed updating), a single order for that item will split into a double order, with the charges doubled.

This was documented on this very forum months ago with the test of the item named "nonexistent item".

 

 

[phaedra Exonar]

You can all so get a double purchase by adding an item to the cart, then clicking on buy now. There use to be a warning if you had more then one of the same item, I just tested and don't see that anymore.  Sounds like a good time to test the new Jira system.

[Darrius Gothly]

The source of this "problem" is the Buy Now button:

When you click it the FIRST time (with an empty Cart), you go directly to the "Review your order" screen:

This is where you should LOOK and make sure you haven't double-purchased something. For example, clicking Buy Now again takes you here:

Notice the two areas I highlighted? The total quantity in your cart is shown in two places. As a web designer myself, I can't see a reasonable way to make this more obvious ... unless of course they make a popup that hollers at you.

When you click the "Go Back" link (below the "Continue" button), you get this:

Notice that I edited the Quantity (Qty) number and then clicked "Update quantities". (I info highlighted their info box abour "Rates" too.)

I do agree though that I wish they would reinstate the "more than one of the same copyable item" warning. However that's not really a "BUG", so I suspect they would close it immediately with the resolution "As designed". *sigh*

[phaedra Exonar]

Your correct that is where people should check, but the number of customers who don't is rather large, but it would be better to just eliminate the problem.  Your right that the "Buy now" button is the problem, it just shouldn't even be there, at Amazon.com you can "add to cart" and then you "view cart" to start the check out process, there's no second way to add to the cart like the "buy now" button on the marketplace.  Most the double purchase I've had from customers are for a single item, where the customer had added the item to the cart thinking they would do more shopping but then decided to just check out so clicked on buy now thinking it would just open the cart to complete the purchase like all most all other shopping carts would. I think it this case people are less likely to check the cart because they think they should only have the 1 item in it, some one with several item's in a cart is more likely to think to check.  It's possible to make a purchase with out ever using the buy now button so it's not even needed. 

[Kampu Oyen]

Thanks, Darrius, for explaining one of the known causes of the "problem", and especially thanks for putting "problem" in quotation marks.

I would like to emphasize that a simple utility was in fact subtracted from the SLM which would somewhat have prevented this outcome as it had before, had this not been subtracted.

That is: an unexplained change was made which reduced the total net utility of the SLM.

And was this the first time for such a thing?

Again applying Occam's Razor, an increasingly repeated outcome stemming from multiple new causes is more likely an intended outcome on someone's part.

Of course, if some readers still do not find valid the theory that the SLM is being gradually engineered to persuade merchants and customers to take their business in-world, a simple scientific test would be:

Watch for the next change (or set of changes as a total event) made to the SLM and see whether it either more encourages continued use of the SLM or more encourages a shift of business to in-world venues.

Not that I think any amount of evidence will matter to some people here, but the test I suggest is a test I have already run continuously over the last year.

And guess what I observed every single time.

[Darrius Gothly]

---

phaedra Exonar wrote:

[snip ... but it would be better to just eliminate the problem.  Your right that the "Buy now" button is the problem, it just shouldn't even be there   .[snip] 

---

Well, the problem really is ... we asked for it.

In the early days of the Marketplace, people (meaning Merchants primarily) we demanding a "Buy Now" button to provide that instant purchase function that XStreet had. Initially they made the Buy Now button add the item to the Cart, but that was as far as it went. Eventually they added the "go to summary page" functionality to it, so it at least pushes the customer into looking at what they're about to buy.

I think the problem is the lack of an "Empty My Shopping Cart" button and a "Remove Item" button for each item listed on the Summary and Revise Quantities pages. IMO if there was a quick "Click-n-Clear" function then far fewer people would "accidentally" leave stuff in their cart that they put there some time earlier. Because the shopping cart lacks a timed garbage collection that removes stale items and items that have been modified since they were added (like price changes, version changes, etc.) then people do not realize there are things in their cart left over from last year.

The only way to remove an item now is to "Go Back" to the page that lets you adjust the number of items you have showing in the Summary. I'd rather they merge the Revise Quantities and Order Summary pages into one; there is no reason they shouldn't allow editing the quantites on the Order Summary page .. and definitely no reason why it needs an extra click to "Go Back" to the Revise Quantities page ... a page you've never visited before! I think most people look at that link and instinctively think it means "Go back to the product page" ... especially if their native language isn't English and/or they'd rather not waste time reading the 20 words of instructions. (which btw most people will not do ... "Me see Link, Me read Link Text, Me know what it means...")

And this really is THE #1 issue that most people, both Merchants and Customers, have with the Marketplace ... it just doesn't "Flow". As you rightly pointed out, other eShopping sites .. and there are 100's of examples all around the web .. do a MUCH better job of streamlining the order process. However the Marketplace, partly because it's based on that "Free Software Package" they used (Spree) as the foundation and partly because the Commerce Dev Team has a very obvious and harmful streak of NIH Syndrome, the Marketplace has suffered from these basic flaws and incongruities since its debut. Others may attribute these things to malice or some sort of grander conspiracy, but I see nothing except stubborn bull-headedness and a lack of willingness to do anything that isn't their own "Original Thought". PAFOOOEYY!

Anyway .. I'm just shouting at the wind and I know it. No amount of pushing, goading, berating or logical arguing will ever convince them to do anything with the Marketplace that they didn't come up with themselves. But, bull-headed is my claim to fame too, so I'll keep on goading, berating, shoving and logicking for as long as I can still click the "Post" button.

Cheers!

[phaedra Exonar]

---

Darrius Gothly wrote:

---

Anyway .. I'm just shouting at the wind and I know it. No amount of pushing, goading, berating or logical arguing will ever convince them to do anything with the Marketplace that they didn't come up with themselves. But, bull-headed is my claim to fame too, so I'll keep on goading, berating, shoving and logicking for as long as I can still click the "Post" button.

Cheers!

---

May be LL will add a "Post Now " button that will post comments faster lol

 

 

[Darrius Gothly]

---

phaedra Exonar wrote:

May be LL will add a "Post Now " button that will post comments faster lol

 

---

And maybe I'll wake up tomorrow with the body of a Greek God. *cackles*

When they first pushed everyone over onto these new Lithium pages, I pointed out that the two messages .. one at the top of the "View Thread" page and one at the bottom .. have entirely different names for the same function. At the top you have:

and at the bottom you have:

You will notice those two links .. worded exactly as shown above .. are still there. Will they enhance the Forum Software? Will they improve the Marketplace? Do they even care about such glaring inconsistencies?

You get two guesses .. and the first three don't count.