Is there a way to script this?

[Jae Serrao]

Ok so I have been having a few new customers trying to pull this "I didn't get my delivery" scam so they can give my transferable items to their friends. Yes I actually caught one and banned her for doing it from my store.  So I was thinking cause when they do this it's either via Meta-Life or MPSL.  So I was wondering if anyone would be willing to write an unpack script with a back end delivery conformation that tells me a box has been unpacked via a private message or email.  Is this possible?  If some one can come up with this I bet they'd make a killing cause noting on Marketplace comes even close.  and I am willing to pay for the work.

[Peewee Musytari]

I know someone that may be able to help you, I will contact you inworld if thats ok with you

[Jae Serrao]

Please do.... will be on shortly

[Irene Muni]

Probably you will find more answers in the Scripting forum: http://blogs.secondlife.com/community/forums/scripting

[Paladin Pinion]

It could be done without too much trouble, but unpackers are very easy to bypass -- just right-click and choose Open. In fact, I don't much like unpacking scripts so I always bypass them and use the manual method instead. So your script idea could work but it wouldn't be completely reliable.

[PeterCanessa Oh]

• Ultimately someone only has to unpack something in a script-disabled parcel to make any script useless.  The following is all you need to be informed the first time anyone rezzes something of yours outside that though:

default{

   on_rez(integer StartParam){

      llInstantMessage("**** YOUR UUID HERE ****", llKey2Name(llGetOwner()) + " rezzed your object " + llGetObjectName());

   }

}

[Peewee Musytari]

PeterCanessa Oh wrote:

• Ultimately someone only has to unpack something in a script-disabled parcel to make any script useless. 

That is true, though I can`t see it being very common for someone to rezz somewhere that they are allowed to build but not allowed to run scripts, I`d rather let people run scripts on my land than rezz their messy prims (though I don`t let them do either hehe)

[Jae Serrao]

I like this much better... TY so much.  This does make more sense. When they rez my box it returns that XX USER rez box named XXXBB makes it even easier.  This will help me lots and if customers don't know its even in there then why would they try to obscure this by rezing in No-Script lands. Furthermore I could have the script destroy/delete itself after message is sent so that way its never even seen as being in the box.

 

As for when people shop in my main store I have it so my vendors deliver a folder with contents rather then a box so I don't have the useless waste of people trying to rez objects on my land.  This problem is only for when I sell via Marketplace or Meta-Life from satellite/mall stores.

 

Thanks everyone for the help.

[PeterCanessa Oh]

Jae.Serrao wrote:

Furthermore I could have the script destroy/delete itself after message is sent so that way its never even seen as being in the box.

 

Oops, your'e absolutely correct.

Although I said "the first time they rez ..." I left out the line "llRemoveInventory(llGetScriptName());" that should have come after the llInstantMessage(...); line.  Apologies, if that isn't there you'll be bombarded by IMs every time someone rezzes something belonging to you, not good!

:-( Unfortunately, this still doesn't stop someone passing-on an object before they even rez it and then claiming not to have received it.  As long as you keep a list of 'known' customers you will be able to spot the fakes though.

[PeterCanessa Oh]

Peewee.Musytari wrote:

I can`t see it being very common for someone to rezz somewhere that they are allowed to build but not allowed to run scripts

 

;-) How to unpack a box if you aren't allowed to rez it where you are = attach the box to your hand, that simple.

Plus, some fraudsters deliberately go to non-script areas specifically to break such 'detection' measures.

[Adromaw Lupindo]

Paladin Pinion wrote:

 

It could be done without too much trouble, but unpackers are very easy to bypass -- just right-click and choose Open. In fact, I don't much like unpacking scripts so I always bypass them and use the manual method instead. So your script idea could work but it wouldn't be completely reliable.

Ain't that the truth, the scripted methods while in concept are convenient I've come to not trust them. A demo item delivered the landmark, notecard but failed to unpack the actual item and cleaned up after itself deleting the box. At least it was a demo so nothing was lost, that time. If it were a real transaction loss the chance of trying again would have been slight at best. Though I thought it odd that the unpacker would have missed the item and couldn’t tell if it was the way the script was done or if it was the network connection failing me at the time.

The manual method worked though.

I toyed in my mind the prospect of notices of delivery, the problems start though when the damned box is no-copy and it self deletes. That is too iffy, an on rez message would cover the giving of the actual box, a message at the end of the give inventory cycle would catch failed transfers how though?

I haven’t seriously tried but it certainly entertained my mind and kept it busy during boring minutes. I like to think about this stuff more than do it at the moment, something I need to fix. :c

[Adromaw Lupindo]

You may want to consider sending a message on first use of the actual item then just sending a message from the containing box. Dotting i's and crossing t's and all that. The box itself may not always guarantee every customer got the goods; if you have both messages though you could be more confident.

Including more information about the transfer such as devising an id that is unique and sent by both the box and the item may or may not be overdoing it. I'll leave that to someone else more experienced.

[Kristin Burner]

meow

 

Most stores have no refund/exchange/replaces nothing on transfer items.

So personally i would just put that policy up like most stores.

 

Any scripted solution is subject to failure, so it most likely best to deal with this via policy.

 

Or make your stuff no transfer, then have redelivery terminal in your store.

 

 

arf arf arf

[Jae Serrao]

Ok need a bit more help...

 

llEmail("MYPRIVATE@gmail.com", llKey2Name(llGetOwner()) + " rezzed your object " + llGetObjectName());

 

What is wrong with this the error is said to be inbetween the last 2 "))"

"Function call mismatches type or number of arguments"  that is the error I get...

[Adromaw Lupindo]

You supplied it only two arguments when it requires three arguments.

"llEmail( string address, string subject, string message );"

Arguments are separated by ,

[Jae Serrao]

OMG thank you so much....!  This was driving me NUTZ!

 

Finished now to see how it works

[Jae Serrao]

Y@Y IT WORKS!

 

Final test subject to me

show details 12:11 AM (0 minutes ago)

Object-Name: Final test subject
Region: Centerport Beach (183552, 246272)
Local-Position: (172, 193, 27)

Jae Serrao rezzed their purchase Final test subject

 

This was my email!  So I got an IM my COO got her IM and I GOT AN EMAIL!

Sweet...  Thank you all so much

[Jae Serrao]

The problem with this is not everything  I sell is prim. So if i do a full outfit I am screwed if I don't have a prim skirt or other item in there.  Skins and shapes I sell aren't a concern as these are NON Trans so I will replace them all day long if they like.

[Adromaw Lupindo]

That's fair enough, just keep it in mind for if and when the product line expands

[PeterCanessa Oh]

Thanks Adromaw, all contributions to this thread so far have been good and positive (except my own script error!).  How long do you think before we're spammed/trolled :-(

Unfortunately this is an issue that has plagued any seller and a lot of buyers in SL since it started.  The LL servers must recognise when something has been delivered (almost by definition of the system) but we as residents are never given, and have no access to, any notifications.  Caveat Vendor!

My preference is to sell items as copy/no-transfer and just give any recognised customer a new product if they say they had a problem.

[Adromaw Lupindo]

Thank goodness for a weekend off.

It comes in and goes like the tides I guess LOL.

It is an issue faced by all, true, and that is the nature of business. People make policies based on their ability to perform and comfortably be responsible for. I’ll end up getting into another topic more heavily so I’ll cut my response as short as I can. But directly to your bringing up of being able to keep track of things by the nature of it...

The SLMP seems to be keeping track of when it fails to send an item at least and holds off payment until it is made or gives up after 8 hours.

It would be nice if vendors had similar powers to draw upon then just the magic boxes.

 

But all in all, the OP got what they asked for, for the question posed; so this was a pleasant success.