The buyer is always right?

[Iren Tinkel]

1 hour ago, Pamela Galli said:

Apparently there are new people handling flagging. Unlike in the past, they often ignore legitimate flagging of illegitimate reviews. It can thereafter take several Support tickets to get their attention because they will reply with something irrelevant, proving that they did not read the ticket, then close it. Over and over.

Not anything like the prompt efficient handing of flagged reviews was in the past.

Yes, they just close ticket saying something kinda "we dont judge resident relationships, bye". You know, Pamela, I suppose something is gong on there because  no new featured blog posts recently from LL even

[Dakota Linden]

Greetings!

Linden Lab will remove a review if it is in violation of the Second Life policies. 

A user reporting that the product does not work for them, or they purchased the item and they do not like it, do not violate the policies in an of themselves. 

While we understand it is discouraging and sympathize with sellers who receive less than 5 stars reviews, the purpose of the review system is for buyers to note their experiences with the item. Whether that experience is good, bad, or neutral, is entirely up to the buyer themselves. 

 

 

[Iren Tinkel]

Well, Dakota, why suddenly LL changed policy about reviews kinda "i dont like it" - I have no idea.  Sorry but it is not ebay or something else. I DO give opportunity to try all stuff before purchase, I optimize store, I set TP, I set vendors, I make pictures, videos, infocards, I pay sim at last. I BEG customers not to buy stuff without trying. Because I really do everything not to give them disappointment. How ELSE can I make them not to buy things they dont like? I actually have no choice - anyway I will get bad reviews - unfair reviews of people who neglected everything and blame me for their mistakes. You say it is experience of customer and they have right to say about it? Ok, why then i cant say about my experience with this type of customers, why comment tab is hidden and need to click to see comments? Make it clear then - show comment same way as review itself. Grrr, actually there is too much that i cant get over. I am creator, I am very sensitive about my artwork and I have no time to fight with mills and moon activity so I do not see MP attractive for me now. I slightly move to the side of sellers who prefers in-world. It is more easy to communicate with customers without this blackmailing one star thing.

[Dakota Linden]

On 2/19/2018 at 3:07 AM, Iren Tinkel said:

Well, Dakota, why suddenly LL changed policy about reviews kinda "i dont like it" - I have no idea.  Sorry but it is not ebay or something else. I DO give opportunity to try all stuff before purchase, I optimize store, I set TP, I set vendors, I make pictures, videos, infocards, I pay sim at last. I BEG customers not to buy stuff without trying. Because I really do everything not to give them disappointment. How ELSE can I make them not to buy things they dont like? I actually have no choice - anyway I will get bad reviews - unfair reviews of people who neglected everything and blame me for their mistakes. You say it is experience of customer and they have right to say about it? Ok, why then i cant say about my experience with this type of customers, why comment tab is hidden and need to click to see comments? Make it clear then - show comment same way as review itself. Grrr, actually there is too much that i cant get over. I am creator, I am very sensitive about my artwork and I have no time to fight with mills and moon activity so I do not see MP attractive for me now. I slightly move to the side of sellers who prefers in-world. It is more easy to communicate with customers without this blackmailing one star thing.

Greetings Iren!

Flagging a review option has available the choice for "Issue noted in Item Description" specifically for those situations when a buyer purchases an item and leaves a negative review for something already noted. 

As an example, a buyer who leaves a 1 star review complaining that an item is No Modify when the listing shows that the item is No Modify, will find that review removed if it is reported.

Another example is when a buyer purchases an item and complains that everything in the image is not included, but the listing clearly states that the item is a Hood/Hat and the image is used to show what an avatar would look like while wearing the hood/hat.

Unfortunately, no matter how much work a seller puts into their product, or how well they describe the item in the listing, not every customer will be happy with their purchase and Linden Lab is striving for neutral ground between both the sellers and their customers when it comes to the reviews. 

We do understand that improvements in the process and experience can be made, for both the buyers and the sellers, but at this time this is the iteration that is available and being used and all of us must work with what is currently available. 

[Iren Tinkel]

4 hours ago, Dakota Linden said:

Greetings Iren!

Flagging a review option has available the choice for "Issue noted in Item Description" specifically for those situations when a buyer purchases an item and leaves a negative review for something already noted. 

As an example, a buyer who leaves a 1 star review complaining that an item is No Modify when the listing shows that the item is No Modify, will find that review removed if it is reported.

Another example is when a buyer purchases an item and complains that everything in the image is not included, but the listing clearly states that the item is a Hood/Hat and the image is used to show what an avatar would look like while wearing the hood/hat.

Unfortunately, no matter how much work a seller puts into their product, or how well they describe the item in the listing, not every customer will be happy with their purchase and Linden Lab is striving for neutral ground between both the sellers and their customers when it comes to the reviews. 

We do understand that improvements in the process and experience can be made, for both the buyers and the sellers, but at this time this is the iteration that is available and being used and all of us must work with what is currently available. 

Hello again, Dakota. My listing stated that item is working and tested, same as some other reviews showed - item works. Also it has direct TP to check. But anyway person writes "It does not work!", I flagged it as "Issue noted in Item Description" but nothing happened. And you should know how it is harmful when people check why rates so low and see "It does not work!" and they dont want to check it even. This item has at least one sale dayly and after this review - no even one for week. Though I even refunded person same day. I was really frustrated about all this situation because it is my biggest item with tons of effort ( i dont resell stuff, i create it from zero including mesh and 450 animations). After I write ticket to your team hoping that somebody will pay attention to my problem - but nothing! NOBODY CARES. I talked to this person during some days, spending time and my sensual nerves because it is like somebody throws paint on my picture and I cant leave it like that. But I was alone with my problem and it was my experience. I supported MP since arriving as perspective and tolerated all problems with migration, listings and so on but here I stop. I am glad to continue when something with this annoying review thing will change. Something kinda showing seller comments equal or removing review with refund (it is fair at least) or choice for verified seller to deny reviews completely. I will survive without reviews, really.

[ChinRey]

42 minutes ago, Iren Tinkel said:

After I write ticket to your team hoping that somebody will pay attention to my problem - but nothing! NOBODY CARES.

I think you should look again, Iren. As far as I can see, there's not a single low rating review in your store now.

[Pamela Galli]

I understand Dakota’s  point — they can verify whether either something is as described or is about delivery, etc. They can’t verify that something works or not.  That kind of thing we have to contradict in comments. 

 I agree the comments should show by default. That is only fair.

Edited February 20, 2018 by Pamela Galli

[Ela Talaj]

 

9 hours ago, Dakota Linden said:

Greetings Iren!

Flagging a review option has available the choice for "Issue noted in Item Description" specifically for those situations when a buyer purchases an item and leaves a negative review for something already noted. 

As an example, a buyer who leaves a 1 star review complaining that an item is No Modify when the listing shows that the item is No Modify, will find that review removed if it is reported.

 

Well that's exactly what happened to one of my items just recently. A buyer left a one star review complaining that the scripts are not open source.  Moreover the wording of the review is such that it would be considered libelous in any RL jurisdiction. That is in spite of the fact that the listing clearly states in the Permissions Section that the item is no-modify and no-transfer. That is in spite of the fact that all other reviews of this product are, to say the least, very positive (and I did not solicit any).

I flagged it. So far nothing happened. Here is a link for you, Dakota: https://marketplace.secondlife.com/p/CentovaCast-Vendor/5307139 

 Go look for yourself what I have to cope with after providing solutions, which are perhaps not always impeccable but always in good faith and to the best of my knowledge and experience, for over 10 years for thousands of SL residents.

 

 

Edited February 21, 2018 by Ela Talaj
removed double quote

[Pamela Galli]

Ela, the review says that the picture states Copy Mod, which it does.

Edited February 21, 2018 by Pamela Galli

[Ela Talaj]

2 hours ago, Pamela Galli said:

Ela, the review says that the picture states Copy Mod, which it does.

Pam, the OBJECT is modifiable, otherwise the customer cannot enter configuration in the notecard (and most customers don't bother with making their own object and just use mine).

If the customer was confused could've just asked before buying. I get a lot of pre-sale questions about this product and always answer all inquiries.

[Dakota Linden]

Hello Ela Talaj,

As a one time courtesy, I have removed the review.  However, Pamela is correct.  Your product listing is confusing.  This is why the review was not removed originally from your report. 

The Image shows that the item is Modify/Copy/No Transfer.

The permissions on the right side of the listing show that the item is Copy/No Modify/No Transfer.

I reviewed the Item Description and there is nothing in the description that explains the discrepancy with the noted permissions. 

Not all Second Life Users know that even if a script is No Modify that the object itself can still be modified.  If that information is not included by the seller, their customer may be confused or unaware and in those cases, their reviews are legitimate since there is nothing in the listing that indicates otherwise.

I would encourage you to edit the listing to detail the permissions for all parts of the item, including object and scripts, so that any future buyers are not confused by the permissions and the additional information will explain the discrepancy with the reported permissions on the listing.

[Dakota Linden]

Hello Iren,

A review that states only that an item does not work does not violate policy and the review will not be removed.  Linden Lab has no way of knowing if their statement is true or not and the item may not actually be working for that particular buyer. 

A seller is the only one who can work with the customer to try to determine what issue the customer is having and work with them to try to resolve the issue as best as possible. 

[Rolig Loon]

12 minutes ago, Dakota Linden said:

Not all Second Life Users know that even if a script is No Modify that the object itself can still be modified. 

This is definitely true.  It is also true that many creators and merchants (and more than a few Lindens ) are unaware or confused by complexities of the permissions system. I'm going to guess that a lot of complaints about "poorly advertised" products are very hard to avoid.  I wish I knew a good solution.

[Dakota Linden]

1 minute ago, Rolig Loon said:

This is definitely true.  It is also true that many creators and merchants (and more than a few Lindens ) are unaware or confused by complexities of the permissions system. I'm going to guess that a lot of complaints about "poorly advertised" products are very hard to avoid.  I wish I knew a good solution.

Hi Rolig!

Many, MANY, moons ago the old SLExchange/Xstreet Marketplace tried to address the issue, and ran into a brick wall.  Since at that time, the Magic Boxes were being used, the permissions that were pulled were of the box itself, and not the actual items in the box.  We found that reporting the permissions on the box causes just as much, if not more, confusion.

This still holds true today. 

When the Contents tab of a listing is looked at, if the items are in a box, the reported permissions are for the box itself, and not the actual items in the box. 

If the items are in a folder, then the permissions for each and every item are listed, which helps greatly.

Unfortunately, there really isn't a one size fits all solution, which means the responsibility drops firmly and squarely on the shoulders of the seller and to avoid confusion, it is up to the seller to detail the permissions in the Listing Description. 

Even then, buyers can be confused.  But as long as the seller does detail the permissions, if a review is left on the listing that complains about the permissions, Linden Lab can remove the review for the merchant.

It is when no information is detailed that Linden Lab finds its hands tied and will always err on the side of caution and leave the review unless another reason (like profanity) would cause it to be subject to being removed. 

[Pamela Galli]

Also one of the permission boxes a merchant can check, along with c/m/t is See Description. That is specifically for when clarification is required — maybe everything is the same permission except for one item, etc. 

[Rolig Loon]

2 hours ago, Dakota Linden said:

Unfortunately, there really isn't a one size fits all solution, which means the responsibility drops firmly and squarely on the shoulders of the seller and to avoid confusion, it is up to the seller to detail the permissions in the Listing Description. 

Thanks, Dakota. I understand fully. Far from disagreeing, I was simply remarking that sellers and creators are sadly just as confused and frustrated by the quirks of the permissions system as buyers are.  They should be more knowledgeable, but many are not, and the permissions system is far from easy to understand. As a result, i see why Listing Descriptions are sometimes ambiguous or misleading.  Despite being as vigilant as I can about watching the slam bit as I check permissions, and then testing things with my alt, I make mistakes myself -- after eleven years in SL and after spending a lot of time here in the forums to help others understand the system.   I truly do wish I had a clean solution. 

[Pamela Galli]

13 minutes ago, Rolig Loon said:

Despite being as vigilant as I can about watching the slam bit as I check permissions, and then testing things with my alt, I make mistakes myself

I made a mistake not long ago listing permissions and got a one star review stating that the item was beautiful but accusing me of being a lying, thieving, scamming monster.  That I might have made a mistake was not a possibility.

Anyway I did not flag it, I just commented that I had made a mistake. Most people do not consider merchants so godlike as to be above making mistakes.

[Ela Talaj]

7 hours ago, Dakota Linden said:

Hello Ela Talaj,

As a one time courtesy, I have removed the review.  However, Pamela is correct.  Your product listing is confusing.  This is why the review was not removed originally from your report. 

The Image shows that the item is Modify/Copy/No Transfer.

The permissions on the right side of the listing show that the item is Copy/No Modify/No Transfer.

I reviewed the Item Description and there is nothing in the description that explains the discrepancy with the noted permissions. 

Not all Second Life Users know that even if a script is No Modify that the object itself can still be modified.  If that information is not included by the seller, their customer may be confused or unaware and in those cases, their reviews are legitimate since there is nothing in the listing that indicates otherwise.

I would encourage you to edit the listing to detail the permissions for all parts of the item, including object and scripts, so that any future buyers are not confused by the permissions and the additional information will explain the discrepancy with the reported permissions on the listing.

Thank you for your kind attention, Dakota.

In general I would suggest that a main criterion for evaluating reviews for retention should be whether a review pertains to the quality of the listed item or it pertains to the quality of the listing itself. A customer has every reason to expect a quality product but would be unreasonable to expect a professionally made listing as most merchants do not have this kind of experience and no resources to hire someone who does. So in case of a confusion a prudent customer would simply ask the merchant prior to purchasing, especially for big-ticket items. Buying while confused and then blaming the merchant is somewhat disingenuous.

Specifically I would suggest adding another box to the Permissions Section: "open source scripts". This would remove any ambiguity in respect to scripted modifiable objects - either this box is checked or it is not.

[Charlotte Bartlett]

I really don't think reviews should come down to "I did not like it"  1 Star if there is an inworld demo or online demo available.  These should be removed if void of a root cause of that dislike linked to faulty product/misinformation in description etc.  If it's just on the day they woke up they no longer liked yellow sundresses, that is not the merchant's issue or fault.

That's a subjective opinion not a fair review on the product and often is buyer's remorse.  In some (many) cases it's also a bargaining chip to get the creator to refund etc to remove the review.

It doesn't technically breach the guidelines, but it's disingenuous and not helpful to other buyers.   

Honestly, I would prefer reviews gone, instead add "questions" for buyers on there per product so they can ask questions prior to +  after sale and have the creator respond (like Amazon answers).

Buyers will soon see if there is a pattern of issues with a product, if a creator is responsive (+still active in SL) and get WAY more information that gamed reviews we have today.

Edited February 22, 2018 by Charlotte Bartlett

[Sassy Romano]

If you want to disallow a review that says "I do not like it" 1 star, then by the same logic, reviews that give 5 stars "I love it!" should also be removed.

Neither follow the essence or guidelines of the review system.

Would you be wanting to have the second example removed?

 

Edited February 22, 2018 by Sassy Romano
(Edited because the phone can't choose the right words)

[Charlotte Bartlett]

Actually I would 100pct, as again it offers no value to other buyers it's the same "today I liked a yellow sundress".    If, however, it said I liked this item because the mesh was well made, low complexity, matched the description, did not cause me lag and was functional - then that is linked to a root cause and would be fine.    I rarely see 5 star reviews like that so my opinion is across all ratings that don't provide useful information to other buyers.

I see Dakota liked your comment, but did not react to mine

All joking aside, reviews I feel are a less useful aspect to marketplace for both buyers and sellers.  It's a shame as with the items that creators have wanted to be developed with the marketplace are still sadly lacking.  Whilst,  the features we "do" have don't necessarily offer the value initially hoped for and likely still take time to administer that could be more effectively used for other things.

Edited February 23, 2018 by Charlotte Bartlett

[mikka Luik]

23 hours ago, Ela Talaj said:

Specifically I would suggest adding another box to the Permissions Section: "open source scripts". This would remove any ambiguity in respect to scripted modifiable objects - either this box is checked or it is not.

Just in that last point. If I had the chance to make any script included in an item Copy, Mod and no transfer I would very happily. But it is not possible. Would be nice in terms of how an item shows up in inventory but its not possible with the granularity of current permissions system and adding a note in the listing to explain... well yes it is an option. Copy and Mod != open source. Another box to tick which == CMT isn't really useful.

Unless I am missing something.

 

On reviews in general, are comments on a review still allowed from people who never purchased a product? If so, why?

 

[Dakota Linden]

16 hours ago, mikka Luik said:

Just in that last point. If I had the chance to make any script included in an item Copy, Mod and no transfer I would very happily. But it is not possible. Would be nice in terms of how an item shows up in inventory but its not possible with the granularity of current permissions system and adding a note in the listing to explain... well yes it is an option. Copy and Mod != open source. Another box to tick which == CMT isn't really useful.

Unless I am missing something.

 

On reviews in general, are comments on a review still allowed from people who never purchased a product? If so, why?

 

Hello Mikka!

The CMT options on a listing are based on the Second Life Permissions system. 

If the product contains various content items, like textures, or appliers, that result in a mix of permissions, then the See Item Description option should be ticked and the permissions detailed in the Item Description itself. 

The Item Description should be used to provide potential buyers as much information about the product as possible.  If this includes Open Source scripts, then that information should also be included. 

It is not possible for anyone to review a product that they have not purchased/received through the Marketplace.  However, anyone can leave a reply to an existing review, even if they did not purchase the item through the Marketplace.

[Rolig Loon]

A couple of times in this thread, I commented that I wished I had an easier solution to the problems we all have with setting perms properly.  Well, now I do.  It's not foolproof, but it should help.  I've just posted a scripted tool in the Creation >>> LSL Scripting Library that you and an alt can use to test perms on objects that you intend to release for sale.  It's at

There's nothing magical about it, and it won't absolve anyone of responsibility for diligent testing, but may help.

[Charlotte Bartlett]

4 hours ago, Rolig Loon said:

A couple of times in this thread, I commented that I wished I had an easier solution to the problems we all have with setting perms properly.  Well, now I do.  It's not foolproof, but it should help.  I've just posted a scripted tool in the Creation >>> LSL Scripting Library that you and an alt can use to test perms on objects that you intend to release for sale.  It's at

There's nothing magical about it, and it won't absolve anyone of responsibility for diligent testing, but may help.

that's awesome thank you!  I can't tell you when I am packing up 14 gacha items one set mod/trans and one mod/copy how easy it is to get it wrong - this will be super helpful as part of the workflow thank you so much for doing!