LL, MP, and Credibility

[raven33]

So, I found out yesterday that a merchant can have negative reviews removed. There is no review, process, or research involved they simply can get them removed. 

This got me thinking. Ever buy an item and wonder why all the positive reviews when its not a good item? Well the answer is that all the bad reviews were probably deleted. 

Wanted to put the word out in case people did not know, that reviews, or LL have absolutely ZERO credibility on the MP. 

[So Whimsy]

You are missguided in your thinking.

Merchants do not have the ability to simply remove a review. They can flag the review and an LL staff member will look over it and decide whether or not the review is warranted and leave it standing or it's unwarranted (complaining about an item as no mod when the merchant made it clear that its no mod for example) and remove it.

The process isn't fool proof, sometimes bad unwarranted reviews are left standing even though the merchant flagged them but again, merchants cannot remove reviews themselves, only a Linden Lab employee can.

[Ethan Paslong]

46 minutes ago, raven33 said:

So, I found out yesterday that a merchant can have negative reviews removed. There is no review, process, or research involved they simply can get them removed.

not true, there are several discussions about this already. Also explained by LL employees.

Please dig a bit deeper in this forumssection and you'll find it.

[Cindy Evanier]

^^  What Ethan says.. Dakota Linden has posted many times about the review process for removing MP reviews.  Seek and you shall find her posts  the 

[LittleMe Jewell]

1 hour ago, raven33 said:

So, I found out yesterday that a merchant can have negative reviews removed. There is no review, process, or research involved they simply can get them removed. 

This got me thinking. Ever buy an item and wonder why all the positive reviews when its not a good item? Well the answer is that all the bad reviews were probably deleted. 

Wanted to put the word out in case people did not know, that reviews, or LL have absolutely ZERO credibility on the MP. 

I'm guessing that you left a negative review for something and the review got removed.   To ensure that a review is not removed, it needs to be factual and state a VALID reason for the negative review.  Not liking something or not getting what you thought simply because you didn't read or understand the description are not valid reasons for a bad review.

[sirhc DeSantis]

 

[ChocolateEclair]

Just had this happen to me recently as well. Seller was constantly flagging literally every comment made in the review, as well as the review itself to get it taken down. Absolutely nothing in the review was stated in a way that should have been removed as well as everything in said review was 100% factual.So while a Linden might be at fault for removing said review, without actually contacting people in question for proof before deleting a review seems sketchy at best. Especially since it also seems that the star rating is also removed when a review is removed.

[Pamela Galli]

2 hours ago, ChocolateEclair said:

Just had this happen to me recently as well. Seller was constantly flagging literally every comment made in the review, as well as the review itself to get it taken down. Absolutely nothing in the review was stated in a way that should have been removed as well as everything in said review was 100% factual.So while a Linden might be at fault for removing said review, without actually contacting people in question for proof before deleting a review seems sketchy at best. Especially since it also seems that the star rating is also removed when a review is removed.

You might consider reading Dakotas sticky or the other posts in this thread. 

[ChocolateEclair]

Did. Statement still stands.

[Pamela Galli]

3 minutes ago, ChocolateEclair said:

Did. Statement still stands.

I didn’t really understand your point, but you seem to disagree with Dakota, and she is the definitive authority on the subject of reviews.

[Chic Aeon]

Merchants CANNOT automatically have reviews removed. That would actually negate the whole review process. Merchants can FLAG a review for POSSIBLE removal and there is criteria in order to get a review removed. I have had reviews removed and NOT removed. Merchants have no magic wand here. 

[ChocolateEclair]

Sort of. Merchants can not remove a review themselves, correct. However they can flag one, and a Linden can remove it. Which a series of problems. First, if someone's review is flagged, their rating is removed AND they're not allowed to post a new review. Which DOES allow sellers to manipulate their score. This is straight fact. Secondly, it is very possible for Lindens to be in the wrong as well. Especially if they only take a cursory look at things without trying to confirm anything.

[Pamela Galli]

57 minutes ago, ChocolateEclair said:

Sort of. Merchants can not remove a review themselves, correct. However they can flag one, and a Linden can remove it. Which a series of problems. First, if someone's review is flagged, their rating is removed AND they're not allowed to post a new review. Which DOES allow sellers to manipulate their score. This is straight fact. Secondly, it is very possible for Lindens to be in the wrong as well. Especially if they only take a cursory look at things without trying to confirm anything.

 You are still confused about problems that  do not exist — unless you just mean to remind us that Lindens are fallible like everyone else — but I don’t think I have the ability to unconfuse you. I again refer you and all readers to review Dakotas last word on the subject.

Edited June 19, 2018 by Pamela Galli

[ChocolateEclair]

Considering that I've experienced  "problem that does not exist" I'll have to strongly disagree with you. The current system is fairly gameable. Especially if you consider that unhappy reviewers are going to be more likely to fall under the rules that has them removed. Its pretty simple to flag everything thats negative. Even if only one out of five negative reviews are removed, if that one had a legitimate complaint having both their review, and score removed is a net gain for the seller. Doubly so because once a review is removed due to flagging, it can not be replaced. So not only is the consumer screwed out of a product, they're also screwed out of giving warning to other customers and expressing their dissatisfaction.

So yeah, while a Linden gets the final say in the matter, there is an immense benefit towards sellers to flag every negative review they get in order to improve the appearance of their product. Hell, apparently its also okay to not only to bribe, but also threaten people into giving positive reviews, and when they don't? Flag the review for removal. And as a reminder, this is not a what if, nor a hypothetical situation. This is what I have experienced personally.

Edited June 19, 2018 by ChocolateEclair

[ChinRey]

10 hours ago, ChocolateEclair said:

Sort of. Merchants can not remove a review themselves, correct. However they can flag one, and a Linden can remove it. Which a series of problems. First, if someone's review is flagged, their rating is removed AND they're not allowed to post a new review. Which DOES allow sellers to manipulate their score. This is straight fact.

Not quite. Even if somebody flags a review, there is no guarantee LL agrees to remove it. I'm sure you realize that but I think it's important point to make that clear.

 

10 hours ago, ChocolateEclair said:

Secondly, it is very possible for Lindens to be in the wrong as well.

No! Never!

But seriously...

10 hours ago, ChocolateEclair said:

Especially if they only take a cursory look at things without trying to confirm anything.

Yes, it's fairly obvious that's what they do. When you flag a listing or review, you get to select a reason for it from a very short and incomplete list of rather broad categories. That's all the information they want and ask for. If they really were to process al flaggings thoroughly and fairly based only on that, half the Lindens would have had to work full time on MP flaggings.

On the bright side, reviews and star ratings don't really matter much. The ratings used to be important for search ranking but they've changed that. As for shoppers, the few who actually pay attention to them, tend to be the kind of people who pay attention to other factors too and are able to think for themselves.

Edited June 19, 2018 by ChinRey

[ChocolateEclair]

Somewhat difficult for them to pay attention to anything when said negative reviews and comments are being purged however. Hell, in my case I've been watching this creator literally flag every negative review and comment. Not sure exactly why they're having so many taken down either, especially when they all say the exact same thing. You'd think LL would maybe stop and consider that hey, all of these people are saying similar stuff. Maybe we should not remove these comments that are trying to warn other potential buyers?

Edited June 19, 2018 by ChocolateEclair

[Pamela Galli]

7 hours ago, ChocolateEclair said:

Somewhat difficult for them to pay attention to anything when said negative reviews and comments are being purged however. Hell, in my case I've been watching this creator literally flag every negative review and comment. Not sure exactly why they're having so many taken down either, especially when they all say the exact same thing. You'd think LL would maybe stop and consider that hey, all of these people are saying similar stuff. Maybe we should not remove these comments that are trying to warn other potential buyers?

 Because what they are warning others about is already discussed in the item description, for example, or is  about some other thing that the creator has no control over or has nothing to do with the quality of the actual product. As Dakota says, those reviews not relevant to other potential buyers and have no value.

 That you have been told this several times and still are unable to understand goes a long way to explain why your reviews get deleted. 

[ChocolateEclair]

5 hours ago, Pamela Galli said:

Because what they are warning others about is already discussed in the item description, for example, or is  about some other thing that the creator has no control over or has nothing to do with the quality of the actual product. As Dakota says, those reviews not relevant to other potential buyers and have no value.

Cool assumption, but completely wrong. In this particular case, whats being discussed and removed is how the creator handles their customer service. In particular, that they treat their customers poorly, and has and continues to ban/block literally everyone who has a problem with their product. Even legitimate complaints, such as the mesh having errors in it. You voice any opinion other than 100% approval of said product, you go on a black list which denies you further access to any updates. Which is of course ironic, but does reflect the quality of said product.

 

So I'll ask bluntly, are you trying to imply that the continued updates and denial of them is not something a customer should be informed of? Is also poor treatment of customers something they should be left to discover for themselves the moment they need assistance something they should be kept in the dark for? And keep in mind, these are not isolated cases.  Also, I may not have been clear enough, but this isn't like they're not updating the product. The product has been updated already, they're just picking and choosing who gets said updates. Less than 5 star review = No Update.

Edited June 20, 2018 by ChocolateEclair

[Pamela Galli]

4 hours ago, ChocolateEclair said:

Cool assumption, but completely wrong. In this particular case, whats being discussed and removed is how the creator handles their customer service. In particular, that they treat their customers poorly, and has and continues to ban/block literally everyone who has a problem with their product. Even legitimate complaints, such as the mesh having errors in it. You voice any opinion other than 100% approval of said product, you go on a black list which denies you further access to any updates. Which is of course ironic, but does reflect the quality of said product.

 

So I'll ask bluntly, are you trying to imply that the continued updates and denial of them is not something a customer should be informed of? Is also poor treatment of customers something they should be left to discover for themselves the moment they need assistance something they should be kept in the dark for? And keep in mind, these are not isolated cases.  Also, I may not have been clear enough, but this isn't like they're not updating the product. The product has been updated already, they're just picking and choosing who gets said updates. Less than 5 star review = No Update.

I am not implying anything about this creator as I have no idea what she is selling. I am just pointing out that Dakota has made plain what the criteria for review removal is, and it’s not arbitrary — they may make mistakes, but they don’t as a policy remove a review just because it was flagged, as you seem to imply (“these are not isolated cases”). LL is not in cahoots with creators. 

 I don’t know how it is that you know the creator “blocks everyone” , or puts people on a blacklist, or takes any other blanket actions you claim. How do you know this? How do you know who does and does not get an update, or who has had reviews removed? Do you have a spy in the operation? 

 

Edited June 20, 2018 by Pamela Galli

[ChocolateEclair]

2 minutes ago, Pamela Galli said:

 I don’t know how it is that you know the creator “blocks everyone” , or puts people on a blacklist, or takes any other blanket actions you claim. How do you know this? How do you know who does and does not get an update, or who has had reviews removed? Do you have a spy in the operation? 

Gee, how could I possibly know? Could it be because, as I said, it isn't an isolated instance and I'm not the only person its happened to? Could it be that, maybe, I've spoken to other people and have seen them say similar things? Though its hard to gauge how often this seems to happen considering that comments which say the same thing get flagged and removed.

So maybe LL isn't in cohoots with creators, not that I ever said they were. However, if they're making mistakes, it seems to be the same mistake being repeated at nausium here.

[Pamela Galli]

50 minutes ago, ChocolateEclair said:

So maybe LL isn't in cohoots with creators, not that I ever said they were. However, if they're making mistakes, it seems to be the same mistake being repeated at nausium here.

So if you are not implying that LL is conspiring with creators to go against their stated policy and remove legitimate reviews, how do you account for them allegedly making the same “mistake” repeatedly? What exactly is the point of all your posts, other than to claim you have inside knowledge of who a creator sends updates to and blocks? If you are not saying LL is being dishonest, what are you saying?

[Luna Bliss]

5 hours ago, ChocolateEclair said:

In particular, that they treat their customers poorly, and has and continues to ban/block literally everyone who has a problem with their product. Even legitimate complaints, such as the mesh having errors in it.

I understand both the merchant and customer perspective because I am both a merchant and a customer here -- I sell to others on the MP and through custom jobs, and I purchase items on the MP and hire custom work frequently for some parts of custom sims.
In my 'well over a decade experience' I have encountered both sides exhibiting competent and incompetent behavior equally.
Likewise with the few reviews of my MP items that did not seem fair to me, some were solved successfully in my favor, but with some the bad reviews were not removed or were only modified to eliminate parts where a customer went berserk. So I don't believe there is any bias from the LL in favor of either merchants or customers.

In order to sort this out we'd need a little more information from you:

1. What was wrong with the mesh you reviewed negatively?
2. Please copypaste your initial review.
3. Did you try to contact the merchant first, or did you only leave a review?

I have to say I feel irritated when people leave a negative review and don't bother to contact me first, because it indicates a lack of trust in me. At the same time, I understand why a customer feels compelled to leave a bad review instead of contacting a merchant and so I attempt to stuff my irritation -- I try to remember that more likely than not the customer has had a bad experience contacting a merchant in the past and fears this will happen again. Also, the merchant is in a power position as the customer has given money and all they can do is trust the end of the exchange will be fair to them, and so the customer sometimes feels uncomfortable. Hence, knowing this, I accept a degree of 'attitude' from a customer, and realize that having the leverage of a review is one way they can feel empowered.

[ChocolateEclair]

2 minutes ago, Pamela Galli said:

So if you are not implying that LL is conspiring with creators to go against their stated policy and remove legitimate reviews, how do you account for them allegedly making the same “mistake” repeatedly? What exactly is the point of all your posts, other than to claim you have inside knowledge of who a creator sends updates to and blocks? If you are not saying LL is being dishonest, what are you saying?

As I've stated before, my point is that the current system is exploitable and in heavy favor of the seller. Due to the nature of the rules and the crusory glances that LL give, it can allow for well.. Sellers to exploit the review system, and I'm citing my current experience as an example of how. In all honesty, I don't think LL should be removing reviews at all unless there are extreme cases.

 

4 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

1. What was wrong with the mesh you reviewed negatively?
2. Please copypaste your initial review.
3. Did you try to contact the merchant first, or did you only leave a review?

1. Originally, the mesh had holes in it. And I don't mean viewer doing something funky. I mean the mesh itself wasn't aligned the way it was reported to be.

2. Initial review is gone, initially reviewer had demanded I take down the review in exchange for an update, and threatened to ban me should I post another negative review. Which in turn lead to me putting up a worse review largely centering around that interaction since I was forbidden from actually seeing said update. No qoutes were used, no hateful text. Nothing that honestly should have gotten removed in my opinion.

3. Review first. There was no demo on the product, and I don't normally contact reviewers over their products prior to reviewing. I'm usually quite happy to take down and revise reviews if the problems are fixed however. I generally write reviews for other people seeking the product, so that they can know what the current state of the item in question was and any other info they should need to know. That said, I did contact the merchant upon their request, and initially they seemed like they were going to just paw the problem off as an unfixable LL bug, even though they seemed to have no problem fixing it when I said it was unfortunate but the review would need to say. The ironic bit however is that despite me saying I would happily take it down and change the review, the seller decided to threaten me  upon actually putting out said update.

[Pamela Galli]

25 minutes ago, ChocolateEclair said:

As I've stated before, my point is that the current system is exploitable and in heavy favor of the seller. Due to the nature of the rules and the crusory glances that LL give, it can allow for well.. Sellers to exploit the review system, and I'm citing my current experience as an example of how.

You have certainly not shown that the current system is in favor of sellers. You have only shown that the system has limitations, which no one denies. Again, If you think the system needs improvement, quote Dakotas explanation of the system and suggest specific suggestions — the only one you have given is to allow anyone to post unfair, fraudulent negative reviews for any reason.

And that seems to be your whole point.

Also, as we say here ad nauseum: NEVER EVER EVER BUY ANYTHING WITHOUT INSPECTING A DEMO

Edited June 20, 2018 by Pamela Galli

[ChocolateEclair]

11 minutes ago, Pamela Galli said:

You have certainly not shown that the current system is in favor of sellers. You have only shown that the system has limitations, which no one denies. Again, If you think the system needs improvement, quote Dakotas explanation of the system and suggest specific suggestions — the only one you have given is to allow anyone to post unfair, fraudulent negative reviews for any reason.

Not what I said at all, and can you stop with that, please? You keep on making these gross assumptions and trying to pin them on me. I -am- saying however that the current system is flat out not working if legitimate grievences in reviews are being removed completely. Extremes like fraudulent reviews should be removed. However, steps should be taken to ensure that they -are- fraudulent to begin with, cause otherwise again you come to this situation where actual problems are removed because a seller claimed otherwise. I can not pin down what needs to be changed off hand, because I'm frankly unsure as well. My best guess is that at least one Linden is taking a VERY liberal understanding of hatespeech or flaming and is using that as grounds for removal.

Also, if you're going to say stuff like that, then perhaps it should be mandatory for all items to have demos in order to be sold on the MP? Though I doubt you'd want that either because it'd be a hassle for merchants.

Edited June 20, 2018 by ChocolateEclair