Freebie Roadmap

[Darrius Gothly]

Okay, now that I have your attention:

There has long been this ongoing battle between legitimate Sellers and Scammers/CopyBotters. Linden Lab is quite honestly too swamped to effectively police the entire Marketplace. From time to time a Seller will stumble across one of their items being resold, often for a pittance, by someone that either stole it, CopyBotted it, or is just plain scamming the unwary customer. The scam seller will often put a bargain basement price on items so even the most wary of shoppers will buy it anyway.

So here's an idea:

When a Seller has an item flagged and removed for nefarious reasons (IP Infringement, Obvious Scams, etc.) each sale of ANY other item from the Seller's store will be assessed a small "Administrative Fee". For example, if something is being sold for L$7, the usual commission is L$0 ... LL makes nothing. But if the Seller has been "corrected" by having items removed via LL's Administrative actions then any item the Seller sells will have an automatic Admin Fee of, for example, L$2.

The Admin Fee could last for a week ... the first time. Additional "corrections" will extend that time. At some preset threshold the Admin Fee will be doubled. Continued abuse, continued malfeasance by the Seller will continue to double the fee and extend the term of the assessment period.

The idea is that eventually the Seller will no longer be making any money AND Linden Lab will be able to recover some of their expenses in having to police the Marketplace. There won't be any overt indication that the Seller is being assessed the Admin Fee. From the "outside" things will appear as normal. But the Scammer will eventually get the message that their actions are netting them nothing but excess work with no payoff.

Anyway .. it's just an idea. Feel free to blow giant craters in it. I'll be happy to add it to my ever-growing list of massively malfunctioning ideas. 

[Klytyna]

15 hours ago, Darrius Gothly said:

Anyway .. it's just an idea. Feel free to blow giant craters in it. I'll be happy to add it to my ever-growing list of massively malfunctioning ideas

"Dear merchant, you have been found guilty of unspecified crimes in accordance with the 2018 'jack up our profits' act, your mp transaction tax is now 10% instead of 5%, Yours sincerely,  Scrooge Linden. Ho Ho Ho!"

Such a proposal removes the incentive to deal with rogue vendors, instead it encourages the tolerance of said vendors as they pay more TAX!

As for the assumption that items sold at keen prices are automatically 'copybotted', that's just laughable. It's quite common in some of the bargain hunter/shopper groups, for clueless individuals to state...

"I was just as Store X and they were selling a Store Y dress for less than half price, these copybotters are so blatant!"

Then you point out to them that Store Y uses Full Perm Template Mesh that they buy from Vendor Z, who also sell to Store X, Store A, Store B, and Store C, all of whom charge less than the rip off merchant at Store Y.

Add these two trends together, and you basically have a reason for LL to be lax in investigating and dismissing fake copybot accusations, instead finding people 'Auto-Guilty' because it jacks up the stores TAX rate.

Not a good idea...

PS. Change the title to something that actually means something, else your thread might be seen as a 'scam'. 
 

[Darrius Gothly]

6 minutes ago, Klytyna said:

"Dear merchant, you have been found guilty of unspecified crimes in accordance with the 2018 'jack up our profits' act, your mp transaction tax is now 10% instead of 5%, Yours sincerely,  Scrooge Linden. Ho Ho Ho!"

On the contrary. When LL removes an item from the Marketplace there are very strict rules and, in some cases, laws that they have followed. Dakota Linden could probably provide a more fullsome explanation of the process, but I know there is a strict process. I also know that LL is obligated to keep their actions and reasons confidential. They cannot and will not notify the Reporter that actions were taken. And they cannot make it obvious that a particular Seller is under Sanctions.

11 minutes ago, Klytyna said:

As for the assumption that items sold at keen prices are automatically 'copybotted', that's just laughable. It's quite common in some of the bargain hunter/shopper groups, for clueless individuals to state...

"I was just as Store X and they were selling a Store Y dress for less than half price, these copybotters are so blatant!"

Then you point out to them that Store Y uses Full Perm Template Mesh that they buy from Vendor Z, who also sell to Store X, Store A, Store B, and Store C, all of whom charge less than the rip off merchant at Store Y.

I did not assert that inexpensive items are automatically stolen or illegally obtained. I made the assertion that CopyBotters mark their items with insanely low prices to overcome the "too good to be true" instinct in wary shoppers. It also has the double benefit of getting LL to give them money without taking any for themselves. So it's a form of "sticking it to the man".

15 minutes ago, Klytyna said:

Add these two trends together, and you basically have a reason for LL to be lax in investigating and dismissing fake copybot accusations, instead finding people 'Auto-Guilty' because it jacks up the stores TAX rate.

As I said just above, LL must follow strict rules and in some cases laws before removing a Seller's item from the Marketplace. They are not known for willy-nilly removals. If anything the opposite is true. Since L$ Admin Fees are not really money in their pocket (please let's not start THAT discussion from here) I sincerely doubt they would suddenly turn into a money-grubbing criminal enterprise of their own. Caution is one thing, but paranoia is quite out of place here.

[Klytyna]

3 minutes ago, Darrius Gothly said:

Since L$ Admin Fees are not really money in their pocket

Oh of course... A company goes to all the bother of imposing a 5% transaction fee, because the DON'T make actual money off that, and the higher fees in Sansar are also designed NOT to make money.

If there was no financial benefit to LL from that 5% tax, there wouldn't BE a 5% tax.

6 minutes ago, Darrius Gothly said:

LL must follow strict rules and in some cases laws before removing a Seller's item from the Marketplace. They are not known for willy-nilly removals. If anything the opposite is true

They make the rules, and they enforce them, and if they are known for leaving items on the MP now, imagine how much more likely that  will be if they can charge higher tax on said items...

Oh wait, you REALLY think LL created a 5% tax system on the MP, just for 'Gits & Shiggles'... Hahahaha!
 

[Darrius Gothly]

3 minutes ago, Klytyna said:

Oh of course... A company goes to all the bother of imposing a 5% transaction fee, because the DON'T make actual money off that, and the higher fees in Sansar are also designed NOT to make money.

If there was no financial benefit to LL from that 5% tax, there wouldn't BE a 5% tax.

They make the rules, and they enforce them, and if they are known for leaving items on the MP now, imagine how much more likely that  will be if they can charge higher tax on said items...

Oh wait, you REALLY think LL created a 5% tax system on the MP, just for 'Gits & Shiggles'... Hahahaha!
 

Okay, here we go anyway. The "5% Tax" (as you call it) isn't income. It's actually a decrease in expenses. L$-based fees they charge are future money they don't have to pay out to Residents that cash out L$ to real-world currency. I am well aware that the recovered expenses are quite sizable and are a major item on LL's Balance Sheet. But I believe the minor amount gained from an "Admin Fee" strategy such as I have proposed would NOT be enough to make them rewrite their rules or break laws. Yes, they are a greedy private entity. But they are not a Law Enforcement Stupid enterprise.

BTW: "Gits & Shiggles" .. got me shiggling too.

[Darrius Gothly]

23 minutes ago, Klytyna said:

They make the rules, and they enforce them, and if they are known for leaving items on the MP now, imagine how much more likely that  will be if they can charge higher tax on said items...

I just reread this paragraph. I think I need to more clearly state my proposal. The Admin Fee is levied only after an item has been removed from the Seller's store as a result of following the various rules and laws against scams, fraud, theft, IP Infringement, etc. LL won't be charging an Admin Fee on the violated item, they will be charging an Admin Fee on all the OTHER items the Seller has for sale.

If it was an innocent mistake and a Seller inadvertently listed a fraudulent item for sale, the penalty charged will most likely be miniscule but memorable. But if the Seller is indeed a repeat offender, the Admin Fees will increase and eventually reach a point where they completely overwhelm any ill-gotten profit the fraudulent Seller was hoping to make.

It's also quite conceivable that every Seller get one Mulligan (a forgiven oopsie). This is akin to the Insurance Industry's recent feature of offering "Accident Forgiveness" where your first accident does not trigger an increase in your premium.

Edited August 17, 2017 by Darrius Gothly
punctuation

[Ela Talaj]

This is actually an excellent idea in my opinion. Certainly, The Lab's legal department could write up a procedure that would not turn into a can of worms.