Pamela Galli Posted June 20, 2018 Share Posted June 20, 2018 53 minutes ago, ChocolateEclair said: I can not pin down what needs to be changed off hand, because I'm frankly unsure as well. Exactly. When you have a specific suggestion how to improve the review process, post it here as well as in the JIRA, so Lindens can evaluate it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChocolateEclair Posted June 20, 2018 Share Posted June 20, 2018 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Pamela Galli said: Exactly. When you have a specific suggestion how to improve the review process, post it here as well as in the JIRA, so Lindens can evaluate it. Maybe you should try contributing something yourself? Theres clearly a problem here, even if you're unwilling to admit it. Edited June 20, 2018 by ChocolateEclair 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cindy Evanier Posted June 20, 2018 Share Posted June 20, 2018 1 hour ago, ChocolateEclair said: perhaps it should be mandatory for all items to have demos in order to be sold on the MP? I don't think it should be mandatory. It's more a case of buyer beware. If there is no demo (MP or in world) don't take a chance on wasting your L$. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChocolateEclair Posted June 20, 2018 Share Posted June 20, 2018 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Cindy Evanier said: I don't think it should be mandatory. It's more a case of buyer beware. If there is no demo (MP or in world) don't take a chance on wasting your L$. Agreed, though it was more in response to Pamela demanding suggestions while at the same time trying to say that. It would however fix some issues, or allow some customers to make better more informed choices if it was required by all. Edited June 20, 2018 by ChocolateEclair Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pamela Galli Posted June 20, 2018 Share Posted June 20, 2018 21 minutes ago, ChocolateEclair said: Maybe you should try contributing something yourself? Theres clearly a problem here, even if you're unwilling to admit it. I would certainly do so, if I had something to contribute. I think the process, which has undergone multiple revisions over years, with input from buyers and sellers, is as good if not better than anything I could come up with. You are the one who sees a problem. You just can’t come up with a specific suggestion to improve the process, other than to allow all reviews, even the fraudulent or extortionist, remain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChocolateEclair Posted June 20, 2018 Share Posted June 20, 2018 1 minute ago, Pamela Galli said: I would certainly do so, if I had something to contribute. I think the process, which has undergone multiple revisions over years, with input from buyers and sellers, is as good if not better than anything I could come up with. You are the one who sees a problem. You just can’t come up with a specific suggestion to improve the process, other than to allow all reviews, even the fraudulent or extortionist, remain. There you go again with that statement. I've already said thats not what I want, but if you wanna keep believing that go right ahead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pamela Galli Posted June 20, 2018 Share Posted June 20, 2018 2 hours ago, ChocolateEclair said: In all honesty, I don't think LL should be removing reviews at all unless there are extreme cases. This is your only suggestion, but unless you define what an extreme case is, it is not a suggestion that could be implemented. People come here all the time to complain about something, without making clear what their objective is. You seem to feel the review system is broken, and you want it fixed, but you don’t have any suggestion what you want done to fix it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alyona Su Posted June 20, 2018 Share Posted June 20, 2018 I can only say I like the way THIS creator handles his unflattering reviews. To me, this is how it should be done so the potential buyer can see the full story: https://marketplace.secondlife.com/products/11953082/reviews/4298315 https://marketplace.secondlife.com/products/11950777/reviews/4333214 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChocolateEclair Posted June 20, 2018 Share Posted June 20, 2018 1 hour ago, ChocolateEclair said: 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. Bolded this so you can see. And hell, thats a suggestion in and of itself. LL should actually confirm whats being said is true before removing any review. If they're unsure, then it should be left. Removing reviews without any review is a problem and should not be done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pamela Galli Posted June 20, 2018 Share Posted June 20, 2018 18 minutes ago, ChocolateEclair said: Bolded this so you can see. And hell, thats a suggestion in and of itself. LL should actually confirm whats being said is true before removing any review. If they're unsure, then it should be left. Removing reviews without any review is a problem and should not be done. You are describing the current process. They do not remove reviews just because they were flagged. That is not to say they never make mistakes. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChocolateEclair Posted June 20, 2018 Share Posted June 20, 2018 1 minute ago, Pamela Galli said: You are describing the current process. They do not remove reviews just because they were flagged. That is not to say they never make mistakes. No, I'm describing a review process that'd require a more hands on approach that would involve fact checking. Which is not what they do currently. Right now its down to opinion and whim of said Linden who receives the report. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pamela Galli Posted June 20, 2018 Share Posted June 20, 2018 Just now, ChocolateEclair said: No, I'm describing a review process that'd require a more hands on approach that would involve fact checking. Which is not what they do currently. Right now its down to opinion and whim of said Linden who receives the report. They do fact check insofar as they are able: they read the review, the comment from the seller, and the item listing if relevant. What else specifically would you suggest they do? And with that, I will let someone else have the last word. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChocolateEclair Posted June 20, 2018 Share Posted June 20, 2018 (edited) 27 minutes ago, Pamela Galli said: They do fact check insofar as they are able: they read the review, the comment from the seller, and the item listing if relevant. What else specifically would you suggest they do? Again considering whats happened recently, I'd say thats not enough. Contacting the people involved probably should be the next step. However, as I said this should be only reserved for extreme cases such as fraudulent reviews. Everythin else should be just left alone. Conversely, allow people to post reviews after one has been flagged for removal. Or maybe allow people to see -why- something was removed, rather than just have it blanket removed with no reasoning. Edited June 20, 2018 by ChocolateEclair 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Theresa Tennyson Posted June 20, 2018 Share Posted June 20, 2018 3 hours ago, ChocolateEclair said: 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. After reading this thread as an unbiased observer, your apparent approach to life as reflected in your posts suggests to me that your initial reviews were inflammatory whether you realized it or not. I'm not defending the merchant by any means - I know there are merchants out there who are flat-out crazy when it comes to reviews. That being said, the harder you try to make your point in the method you're using, the further you get from my agreeing with you. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChocolateEclair Posted June 20, 2018 Share Posted June 20, 2018 (edited) 35 minutes ago, Theresa Tennyson said: After reading this thread as an unbiased observer, your apparent approach to life as reflected in your posts suggests to me that your initial reviews were inflammatory whether you realized it or not. I'm not defending the merchant by any means - I know there are merchants out there who are flat-out crazy when it comes to reviews. That being said, the harder you try to make your point in the method you're using, the further you get from my agreeing with you. I chose that one in particular, because its the only one that I can possibly think might be stretched enough to fit through process of elimination. There was no profanity, none of the issues were outside of the creator's contro, I did not post chat logs, was not advertising, and I do not make anything to be a competitor to begin with. The only possible one that -could- possibly fit, would need to be hate speech or flaming, however I think you'd need a fairly liberal approach to flaming or hate speech in order to qualify. Also, I made sure to get opinions on the review before I posted it, and showed it to a few friends after. So if it were inflammatory, none of us caught it. If you have any advice for perhaps handling this better/getting my point across better I'd love to hear it. I'm not without faults, and if I can improve in some ways to make my argument better I'd like to know. Edited June 20, 2018 by ChocolateEclair Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Dakota Linden Posted June 20, 2018 Moderators Share Posted June 20, 2018 Greetings! Reviews are removed if they violate the SL Terms of Use or the Linden Lab Terms of Service. This information is again outlined in my post here on the Merchants Forum that was posted earlier, and I will post here again for your convenience: I would direct any user who has had a review removed to the section of the above post with the header, "Writing an Effective Review", and the section immediately below that regarding why reviews are removed. ChocolateEclair, based on the statement in your post on the first page where you stated "in turn lead to me putting up a worse review largely centering around that interaction", the most likely reason why your review was removed would have been because it was a personal attack against the seller, and those are never appropriate in any public area of Second Life, including here in the forums, and on Product Listings on the Second Life Marketplace. This is stated in the link above and in the section that covers why Product Listing Reviews are removed. While we appreciate your desire to protect buyers, including yourself, when it comes to making purchases, especially through the Second Life Marketplace, disputes with any user, regarding any issue, MUST be resolved between the buyer and the seller directly. It is not Linden Lab's place to attempt to mediate Resident to Resident issues, and as such, we do not permit either party to post attacks directed at others in any public location on any Second Life property, as stated above. I am truly sorry that you believe that your review being removed means that Linden Lab is biased towards sellers. I am sure you could easily find any number of sellers who believe exactly the opposite when it comes to having negative reviews removed from their own Marketplace Product Listings. I am locking this thread at this point, so that it does not further devolve into an argument. 2 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Facebook
Instagram
Twitter
YouTube
Flickr
Recommended Posts
Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.