Merchants banning customers from using their products

[Tactical UwU]

I'll avoid naming those I've encountered doing this so far, however I've had an issue where friends and associates who have purchased products from vendors and later left critical reviewers were banned from using any products they had purchased via said vendor due to external server communication used by said products.

Just to be clear, this is fraud on the vendor's part.

In one case, a friend was automatically unseated from any vehicle by the brand including those he owned. This rendered them unusable though others were able to sit and drive them around unabated. These vehicles were no mod so there was no way to prevent them from executing the external communication. This person later got with others who were also banned in a similar manner and had the vendor overturn all bans.

In a more recent case, another vendor has banned a user from using their HUDs which were used to change textures, colors, and various other settings on avatar attachments (namely, apparel). Since the object(s) in question are no mod, this means that said friend cannot modify the attire they had paid for in any way, shape, or form. Again, this took place after said friend left a critical response to one of the vendor's products. They have not had this issue on an alternate account of theirs nor have others reported similar issues. This problem is still affecting them.

Some things I wanted to ask about this issue was,
1. If this a violation of any ToS or usage agreement for the Marketplace?

2. How should we report such individuals?

3. Are we able to recoup losses endured from due to this kind of fraud?

Edited January 10, 2019 by Secondary Lionheart
Clarification

[Alyona Su]

Have those friends and acquaintances flag the items on Market Place and file abuse reports for harassment and fraud. That's about all you can do.

[Prokofy Neva]

Yes, I do not believe the current monopolist on the vendor market or Linden Lab in general should allow this practice physically.

I have had three merchants block me from purchase of their products.

One didn't like my criticism of them on my blog.

Another read something I said on Twitter, took offense at it although none was intended, and blocked me, finally unblocking me when queried.

This monopolist put my name in the ban list of his teleporter, ensuring that many people blocked me from teleportation, their sim, and their vendor. He said he did this as a "sample name". Um, ok. Odd.

Of course, you can get around this sometimes with an alt but why bother? If someone is that vindictive, you don't need to buy their products. It's a very, very creepy precedent for virtual living that LL should not permit. Imagine in RL, for example, if you criticize, say, Trump's wall, and the conservative owner of your supermarket prevents you from using your credit or debit card to buy food. 

The marketplace needs to be as free as possible and that means not having strange inventions like this based on totalitarianism.

[Ethan Paslong]

On 1/10/2019 at 7:26 PM, Secondary Lionheart said:

were banned from using any products they had purchased  due to external server communication used by said products

to be honest i never heared about this practice
Being banned from buying yes, also from shops, but banned of use things you already have?...

[Fionalein]

4 hours ago, Ethan Paslong said:

Being banned from buying yes, also from shops, but banned of use things you already have?...

This also raises the question how those items communicate... I already wonder if my mesh body really has to phone home every time I put it on and look if there is an update... I would not be too happy to know my cars phone home asking wether I am a legit customer...

PS: We talk about fair script use all the time, ... it might be time to pin the term "script polution"

Edited January 14, 2019 by Fionalein

[Kyrah Abattoir]

Not taking the defence of anyone but I'd like to mention there is currently no way for a merchant to prevent a specific (bad) user from buying their products on the marketplace.

As for OP's case I'd be interested in hearing both sides of the argument, in first-person instead of hearsays.

As for  @Prokofy Nevashe merely reaps the fruits of her labor.

Edited January 15, 2019 by Kyrah Abattoir

[Elvina Ewing]

she? i always thought that Prokofy is a he. That's what the name suggests anyway.

[Pixieplumb Flanagan]

14 minutes ago, Elvina Ewing said:

she? i always thought that Prokofy is a he. That's what the name suggests anyway.

I believe the avatar is intended to present as male.  They are pretty insistent about this.   

Edited January 15, 2019 by Pixieplumb Flanagan

[Prokofy Neva]

16 hours ago, Kyrah Abattoir said:

Not taking the defence of anyone but I'd like to mention there is currently no way for a merchant to prevent a specific (bad) user from buying their products on the marketplace.

As for OP's case I'd be interested in hearing both sides of the argument, in first-person instead of hearsays.

As for  @Prokofy Nevashe merely reaps the fruits of her labor.

Yes, I reap the fruits of my labour, which consists of abuse-reporting bad behaviour, calling out bad behaviour, reporting on bad developments, and and debating bad ideas. Happy to reap them. 

[OptimoMaximo]

I don't condone this practice, but i see what's the reasoning behind it. None of the following comes from me, it's pure analysis of thought processes behind this behavior

These merchants get an unfavorable review, which means the customer doesn't like the product. "If you don't like it, then we "switch it off" for you, what's the problem? You first badly criticize the product then you keep using it?"

Edited January 16, 2019 by OptimoMaximo

[Alyona Su]

On 1/15/2019 at 4:15 AM, Kyrah Abattoir said:

Not taking the defence of anyone but I'd like to mention there is currently no way for a merchant to prevent a specific (bad) user from buying their products on the marketplace.

As for OP's case I'd be interested in hearing both sides of the argument, in first-person instead of hearsays.

As for  @Prokofy Nevashe merely reaps the fruits of her labor.

As with any good idea and tool, it can be abused.

The idea of "blacklisting" a user from using something (HUD, attachment, rezzing, etc.) is not new - this has been around for years and it was and still is a way to guarantee customer satisfaction: I sell you this pricey thing that is copyable and I am so confident you will love it that I will even offer you a refund within 90 days after purchase!" 

They do explain up front that if you elect to have a refund that they will then "disable" said product for you and that you will have to contact them if you change your mind and want to buy it again.

So the question at hand, just as @Kyrah Abattoir says: what is the *other side of the story*? Here is what I see in my own head as to what happened:

• Customer buys the product, unhappy, leaves a bad review
• Creator contacts the customer and offers to "make things right", please change review
• Customer refuses, creator sends refund - blacklists user.

I dunno if this is what happened or not (and even if it did: I believe they are both *wrong*). But any respectable (even if not very bright) creator would not blacklist a customer for no reason other than a "bad review". I'm willing to bet that, asked for or not, the creator sent their money back to them then blacklisted them from that product.

Edited January 16, 2019 by Alyona Su

[Theresa Tennyson]

21 hours ago, OptimoMaximo said:

I don't condone this practice, but i see what's the reasoning behind it. None of the following comes from me, it's pure analysis of thought processes behind this behavior

These merchants get an unfavorable review, which means the customer doesn't like the product. "If you don't like it, then we "switch it off" for you, what's the problem? You first badly criticize the product then you keep using it?"

The problem with that is the implied idea that everything must be either perfect or useless. Many things fall somewhere in between. A perfect example are human mesh bodies. Every one I'm familiar with has significant flaws in some way or another; however, the advantages of having a mesh body in general outweigh the disadvantages for most people, and the individual flaws in each one might be more or less of a problem depending on how the purchaser is planning on using it so it would be helpful to have them mentioned in a review. Some of the merchants who get upset over reviews will react over any criticism, including factual criticism that is balanced by also mentioning the advantages.

[OptimoMaximo]

1 hour ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

The problem with that is the implied idea that everything must be either perfect or useless. Many things fall somewhere in between.

I do agree with this. It applies to everything

1 hour ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

Some of the merchants who get upset over reviews will react over any criticism, including factual criticism that is balanced by also mentioning the advantages.

I don-t know that specific cases, but balanced criticism might be seen as unbalanced or covertly balanced, as much as a merchant might be upset at any criticism whatsoever as you say. It-s a minefield, really, and i think it's the ground for the many feature requests regarding the ability to ban specific residents from MP stores. At least, this way you prevent someone from buying any more of your products; disabling an already purchased item isn't fair at all.

[Christhiana]

I think a part of the problem is that some merchants see the review section as a sales tool instead of a customer feedback tool. They only want 5 star review and get upset over anything less. I personally think it's never o.k. to ban a user from using a product they already bought.

[Prokofy Neva]

On 1/16/2019 at 1:48 PM, Alyona Su said:

As with any good idea and tool, it can be abused.

The idea of "blacklisting" a user from using something (HUD, attachment, rezzing, etc.) is not new - this has been around for years and it was and still is a way to guarantee customer satisfaction: I sell you this pricey thing that is copyable and I am so confident you will love it that I will even offer you a refund within 90 days after purchase!" 

They do explain up front that if you elect to have a refund that they will then "disable" said product for you and that you will have to contact them if you change your mind and want to buy it again.

So the question at hand, just as @Kyrah Abattoir says: what is the *other side of the story*? Here is what I see in my own head as to what happened:

• Customer buys the product, unhappy, leaves a bad review
• Creator contacts the customer and offers to "make things right", please change review
• Customer refuses, creator sends refund - blacklists user.

I dunno if this is what happened or not (and even if it did: I believe they are both *wrong*). But any respectable (even if not very bright) creator would not blacklist a customer for no reason other than a "bad review". I'm willing to bet that, asked for or not, the creator sent their money back to them then blacklisted them from that product.

I wasn't aware that you could "change a review" after you've posted it. You can add a comment, yes. So if I put a bad review, and the merchant does change something, I come back with a comment, then someone could see the history of the issue. When I got a bad review on something once, I sat down and changed and fixed things about the product, then put a comment about that so someone could see that it was changed. I wouldn't expect to "wipe out" that bad review or have it editorially changed by me or the customer.

[Prokofy Neva]

On 1/15/2019 at 7:38 AM, Elvina Ewing said:

she? i always thought that Prokofy is a he. That's what the name suggests anyway.

The "she" is only used to harass and heckle, it's not about anything else.

My avatar is a male and should be called "he."

You know, like all the forums regulars who are really males who should be called "she" if they have female avatars because that's the polite and decent thing to do.

There's a custom in SL -- often practiced by males presenting as females, I find, to call me by "she" as way of ridiculing, harassing, shaming, outing RL, etc. BTW, these are TOS offenses, besides being politically-incorrect, or if you like, simply not nice. It is exposure of RL, and it's a violation. *It does not matter* if somehow you know this person's real life, either by stalking and sleuthing, or because they may have even put it on their RL blog, after being stalked and sleuthed, as a form of push-back. 

If you have not put your real life information on your avatar's description, it is not "fair game" to be used to harass and heckle on forums' wars. I find the Lindens are really, really colour-blind when it comes to this harassment of real-life outing, particularly with me. They will cross the Sahara to spot an offense of say, a necro-posting or some nuance of tone that they think "isn't right," but are pur-blind to this. Even when abuse-reported.

I'll repeat: I find those *most guilty* of this particular hate offense are males with female avatars. Not all, but mainly. That's puzzling, until you realize that sometimes, by nature, males want to dominate everything, even as females, and even the process of a female becoming a male -- especially if that f2m is outspoken. Some males seem to think that only they own the process of transformation, and that other shape-shifters have undermined them somehow LOL. That's the only thing I can figure out.

I'll give you a heads up -- 14 years of this sort of harassment in SL has not changed my views, has not silenced me, has not affected me, but only strengthened my resolve to point out once again: if it is not on an avatar's self-description, it is not fair game, the end.

[Fionalein]

2 hours ago, Prokofy Neva said:

The "she" is only used to harass and heckle, it's not about anything else.

My avatar is a male and should be called "he."

You know, like all the forums regulars who are really males who should be called "she" if they have female avatars because that's the polite and decent thing to do.

There's a custom in SL -- often practiced by males presenting as females, I find, to call me by "she" as way of ridiculing, harassing, shaming, outing RL, etc. BTW, these are TOS offenses, besides being politically-incorrect, or if you like, simply not nice. It is exposure of RL, and it's a violation. *It does not matter* if somehow you know this person's real life, either by stalking and sleuthing, or because they may have even put it on their RL blog, after being stalked and sleuthed, as a form of push-back. 

If you have not put your real life information on your avatar's description, it is not "fair game" to be used to harass and heckle on forums' wars. I find the Lindens are really, really colour-blind when it comes to this harassment of real-life outing, particularly with me. They will cross the Sahara to spot an offense of say, a necro-posting or some nuance of tone that they think "isn't right," but are pur-blind to this. Even when abuse-reported.

I'll repeat: I find those *most guilty* of this particular hate offense are males with female avatars. Not all, but mainly. That's puzzling, until you realize that sometimes, by nature, males want to dominate everything, even as females, and even the process of a female becoming a male -- especially if that f2m is outspoken. Some males seem to think that only they own the process of transformation, and that other shape-shifters have undermined them somehow LOL. That's the only thing I can figure out.

I'll give you a heads up -- 14 years of this sort of harassment in SL has not changed my views, has not silenced me, has not affected me, but only strengthened my resolve to point out once again: if it is not on an avatar's self-description, it is not fair game, the end.

It's a rare thing I agree with Proky.... but on this I do 100% - His RL gender despite being more or less common knowledge has no value to any discussion so please leave it out.

[Elvina Ewing]

27 minutes ago, Fionalein said:

It's a rare thing I agree with Proky.... but on this I do 100% - His RL gender despite being more or less common knowledge has no value to any discussion so please leave it out.

if that was pointed at me, then i must have been living under a rock because this apparently "common knowledge" was not mine. Hence, the Prok's post above is a bit confusing to me. I do know that a person called Prokofy Neva has been around for a while and is apparently very famous in some circles, of which i am no part of. I just know that Prokofy is an old russian male name so i was surprised to see people calling him "she" and was curious why that was. Since there is another old russian male name Nikita that has turned into a female name in the West thanks to a famous pop song, i was just curious if something like that was happening here too. I am not aware of all that personal drama that has been going on with Prokofy apparently, and wish to stay out of it.

[Fionalein]

39 minutes ago, Elvina Ewing said:

Since there is another old russian male name Nikita that has turned into a female name in the West thanks to a famous pop song, ...

And I still wonder how stupid humanity can be for that to happen - did they consider Nikita Khrushchev being a girl too? ... then again the general public believes Paris is a female name because some undereducated weirdo with too much money named his daughter after some town... which was named after the mythical dude responsible for the Trojan War ...

Edited January 19, 2019 by Fionalein

[Alyona Su]

9 hours ago, Prokofy Neva said:

I wasn't aware that you could "change a review" after you've posted it. You can add a comment, yes.

You cannot change it, but you can always delete it and create another. When I do that I copy the existing review, then delete it. Then I create a new review with new star rating and comment, then, under the new stuff,  I'll put a title "original review" and paste the original below that, if it's warranted and helps explain any reason for a change, etc.

[Theresa Tennyson]

5 hours ago, Fionalein said:

And I still wonder how stupid humanity can be for that to happen - did they consider Nikita Khrushchev being a girl too? ... then again the general public believes Paris is a female name because some undereducated weirdo with too much money named his daughter after some town... which was named after the mythical dude responsible for the Trojan War ...

People think Evelyn and Joyce are female names too. (Evelyn Waugh and Joyce Kilmer were both men.)

[Wulfie Reanimator]

1 hour ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

People think Evelyn and Joyce are female names too. (Evelyn Waugh and Joyce Kilmer were both men.)

While we're on this topic, Sasha is a boy's name as well, which is what caught me off guard..

Edited January 19, 2019 by Wulfie Reanimator

[Fionalein]

12 minutes ago, Wulfie Reanimator said:

While we're on this topic, Sasha is a boy's name as well, which is what caught me off guard..

Sasha is a Slavic diminuitive of both Alexandr or Alexandra ...

Now that I think about it it's similar gender free as the English abreviation Alex which also applies equaly to those same two names

Edited January 19, 2019 by Fionalein

[Orwar]

   Um. I don't recall ever coming across the name 'Prokofy' before, so I put it into Google because I was curious about its origin... Just, wow. That's some harsh stuff.

   Anyway, on topic: unless the store owner has a disclaimer that they may remotely make your product unusable at a whim, I'd get in touch with LL's support team. That sounds fishy - and familiar. A 'certain' mesh body brand is basically working similarly. It doesn't hurt at least talking to them.

[Kyrah Abattoir]

On 1/16/2019 at 7:48 PM, Alyona Su said:

As with any good idea and tool, it can be abused.

The idea of "blacklisting" a user from using something (HUD, attachment, rezzing, etc.) is not new - this has been around for years and it was and still is a way to guarantee customer satisfaction: I sell you this pricey thing that is copyable and I am so confident you will love it that I will even offer you a refund within 90 days after purchase!" 

They do explain up front that if you elect to have a refund that they will then "disable" said product for you and that you will have to contact them if you change your mind and want to buy it again.

So the question at hand, just as @Kyrah Abattoir says: what is the *other side of the story*? Here is what I see in my own head as to what happened:

• Customer buys the product, unhappy, leaves a bad review
• Creator contacts the customer and offers to "make things right", please change review
• Customer refuses, creator sends refund - blacklists user.

I dunno if this is what happened or not (and even if it did: I believe they are both *wrong*). But any respectable (even if not very bright) creator would not blacklist a customer for no reason other than a "bad review". I'm willing to bet that, asked for or not, the creator sent their money back to them then blacklisted them from that product.

I'd send you the chat log if it wasn't against the TOS.

I didn't offer a refund, I offered assistance, which I always do because that's what I'm supposed to do if I take someone's money.

After we cleared that out they said they didn't like the product and insisted on a refund despite the notransfer situation.

After giving it a thought, I came to the decision that if they didn't like the product, I didn't want their money and we agreed: They would delete the product once they got their refund. I even ate the marketplace fee.

I don't ask people to remove their reviews, I also do not relist products with bad reviews (unlike many).

Refund was sent and it seemed like a done deal.

Later that week, I notice that an update was sent to this person, on the product they got a refund for. I checked my logs for a little while and yeah, the product is querying for update regularly, and at the present time, has been doing so for the past couple of months.

Do note that they can still use the product that they got, I don't do killswitches, but I don't provide support or updates to people who steal from me.

Edited January 20, 2019 by Kyrah Abattoir