PETITION TO ADD AVATAR BAN AND PANIC BUTTON TO MARKETPLACE STORES

[Pamela Galli]

---

Rya Nitely wrote:

 

If merchants abused a ban button wouldn't they be harming themselves more than anyone else? Customers can shop elsewhere

(unlike with Pokemon Go).

If a customer gives a bad rating to an item they probably wouldn't want to shop at that store again anyway.

--- So, why would you care if you got banned?

 

---

Good points, I am sure many of us thought the same thing. 

[Pamela Galli]

---

wherorangi wrote:

---

entity0x wrote:

You either agree or disagree that merchants should have access to ban button, so they can ban whoever they want

'for any reason'

, and explain WHY you hold that position ...

---

the rationale for a host allowing their users to block each other is a resource issue. The host doesnt have sufficient affordable resources to adjudicate every issue between users

the ability to block isnt allowed for any reason at all. Is allowed for no reason at all

+

if we blocked for any reason then it opens up adjudication as a thing to address. Should the host adjudicate ? How much resource needs to be put into this ? How much can the users be expected to pay for this ? Is the reason of sufficient concern to warrant a block ? Should the block be permanent, or should it be time-limited based on the severity of the reason ? etc

when we are allowed to block for no reason at all, then is nothing to adjudicate. There is no reason for the blocking

subjectively unpleasant person: why did you block me ?

merchant: I just did

subjectively unpleasant person: but why ?

merchant: no reason, I just did

subjectively unpleasant person: that so sux for me

merchant: not for me it doesnt

+

allowing blocking for no reason, by a host without the resources to provide a full adjudication system, is the simplist way to allow their users to control their own experience within the host-provided experience  

 

---

Exactly. 

 

(And  :smileyvery-happy::smileyvery-happy::smileyvery-happy:   @ "subjectively unpleasant person"!

[Elvina Ewing]

guys it seems to me you are arguing with an Asperger's patient. Waste of time. Although it's a curious read

On topic: Back in the day there was an old jira somewhere (not sure it is even still there), where i personally voted too (like back in 2010 or something), requesting this very feature on MP. I believe it is as old as the MP itself (since it changed from XStreetSL and became LL's). It had the status "Nice to have" (as opposed to "Severe", "Critical", "Showstopper" and other important statusses), so it will most likely never ever happen.

But yeah I would totally sign this petition! But since LL get a commission off of every sale on MP (which they don't with inworld sales) i suppose it is not in their interest to lose any sales, by giving us the tools to limit sales in any way...

[Darrius Gothly]

---

Elvina Ewing wrote:

<snip> ... But yeah I would totally sign this petition! But since LL get a commission off of every sale on MP (which they don't with inworld sales) i suppose it is not in their interest to lose any sales, by giving us the tools to limit sales in any way...

---

Not saying this is either right or wrong, but it does lead one to the supposition that it would also be counter to their incentives to rapidly remove stores full of items clearly and obviously stolen from legitimate Merchants.

I HAVE seen them pull stores down. I've also seen it take a week or more. I just keep thinking that since it seems Dakota (the Blessed Angel of SLM) is the only one posting in here .. it might also be a case of one brave soul tasked with the Chores of Sisyphus.

[Drake1 Nightfire]

Anyone else smell troll?

[Rya Nitely]

Sadly, I don't. I wish it was. Then it would make it all just a bit of fun - this thread and the others. But this is a real person, and that's sad.

[onyx Kelberry]

Banning could be useful if that also included others from being able to gift to the banned account. Otherwise its useless