Pamela Galli Posted August 8, 2011 Share Posted August 8, 2011 It would be simple enough to put some kind of info up when someone starts a review, stating something to the effect that:reviews should not involve delivery problems, as these are not done by the merchantmerchants should not be negatively rated for customer service if the customer has never contacted themThese things are only fair. A merchant should only be held responsible for what he has control over; we can't control deliveries and we can't handle customer problems if they do not contact us. It is not right to be negatively reviewed for things we have not done wrong. https://jira.secondlife.com/browse/WEB-4046 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toysoldier Thor Posted August 8, 2011 Share Posted August 8, 2011 /me thinks that if the LL Commerce Team found the time to put in a FB button onto all our listings, then this change of simply adding a couple lines of text into the already existing MP Reviews should be even more simple and done in 4.9 minutes. As one might have already said... "this is low hanging fruit". (lets see if LL executes on low hanging fruit not on LL's own private list of MP improvements - stopwatch was clicked on) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chelsea Malibu Posted August 8, 2011 Share Posted August 8, 2011 I see you point and it is well taken as an alternate however, I still hold to my posistion that the ratings function is outdated, gamed, innacurate, hurts new product while giving advantage to antiquated products that may have been well rated before but would not cut it today. In the end.... KILL TO THE RATING SYSTEM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pamela Galli Posted August 8, 2011 Author Share Posted August 8, 2011 Chelsea it looks to me like the sales data for ranking purposes is only for the last day or so. No advantage to stuff that has had a lot of sales in the past. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chelsea Malibu Posted August 8, 2011 Share Posted August 8, 2011 Not sure what you mean but the rankings for ratings in MP is for the length of the item and is there for as long as the item is. So, lets say I had a very popular skin from 3 years ago and today's skins are far better now. The new one having been new will have less people rating it and since they changed how things are rated (no longer pushing you into the rating systems) new items have a lower chance of getting rated. I show ratings still and they count in rankings for products that I have had up for years. It also allow for easy gaming where you can get all of your friends to create a rating for you or worse, your alts. There is nothing fair or useful about the rating system as it is however, they could work if they made some changed. First off, ratings need to die off after time, say 12 months. Second, the rater needs to be identified. It's BS that someone can put one star up and not be identified that they did this. This also allows us to contact unsatisfied customers and correct it. Since I offer a 100% satisfaction guarantee, I would rather give them their money back or fix it, but the current system does not allow it. Last, the ratings a user gives need to be tracked as well as well as who they have rated. If someone constantly gives ratings of 1 stars to all users but 4 stars to another merchant with competing products, we then know that someone is playing with the system. In the end, there is nothing helpful nor fair about the current system and I say this being some with almost all rated items in the 4 star range. In the end, I respect what you are doing as well as your knowledge/ability as a SL creator however, I don't think your motion is nearly enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toysoldier Thor Posted August 8, 2011 Share Posted August 8, 2011 Chelsea Malibu wrote: Not sure what you mean but the rankings for ratings in MP is for the length of the item and is there for as long as the item is. So, lets say I had a very popular skin from 3 years ago and today's skins are far better now. The new one having been new will have less people rating it and since they changed how things are rated (no longer pushing you into the rating systems) new items have a lower chance of getting rated. I show ratings still and they count in rankings for products that I have had up for years. It also allow for easy gaming where you can get all of your friends to create a rating for you or worse, your alts. There is nothing fair or useful about the rating system as it is however, they could work if they made some changed. First off, ratings need to die off after time, say 12 months. Second, the rater needs to be identified. It's BS that someone can put one star up and not be identified that they did this. This also allows us to contact unsatisfied customers and correct it. Since I offer a 100% satisfaction guarantee, I would rather give them their money back or fix it, but the current system does not allow it. Last, the ratings a user gives need to be tracked as well as well as who they have rated. If someone constantly gives ratings of 1 stars to all users but 4 stars to another merchant with competing products, we then know that someone is playing with the system. In the end, there is nothing helpful nor fair about the current system and I say this being some with almost all rated items in the 4 star range. In the end, I respect what you are doing as well as your knowledge/ability as a SL creator however, I don't think your motion is nearly enough. I totally agree and have mentioned many of these concerns and suggestions before - but they were ignored as per usual. I completely agree and fully support that IF the rating system continues (which we all cant predict it will) that at the very least - ratings below 3 should MANDATE that the rater's name be identified. If a customer has that deep a concern about my product AND if this same customer has even approached me to bring up this deep concern to the point that he/she would rate my product a 2 or a 1, then they should be prepared to stand by their serious concern. This gives me the opportunity to contact this user to get more detail. But moreso, by forcing rating identification for ratings below 3. It also stops dead the Gaming and HiJacking that many of us Merchants have experenced by these unscrupulous ppl (be they competitors, griefers, or ppl with an Ax to grind on a Merchant). I also agree that ratings that were set 2 years ago should be aged out. If the rating is 18 months old - it should be removed from the listing like a sliding window. But the best solution.... REMOVE THE RATING SYSTEM ALL TOGETHER. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WADE1 Jya Posted August 8, 2011 Share Posted August 8, 2011 Thanks for this JIRA Pamela Voted +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pamela Galli Posted August 9, 2011 Author Share Posted August 9, 2011 Toysoldier Thor wrote: I completely agree and fully support that IF the rating system continues (which we all cant predict it will) that at the very least - ratings below 3 should MANDATE that the rater's name be identified. If a customer has that deep a concern about my product AND if this same customer has even approached me to bring up this deep concern to the point that he/she would rate my product a 2 or a 1, then they should be prepared to stand by their serious concern. This gives me the opportunity to contact this user to get more detail. But moreso, by forcing rating identification for ratings below 3. It also stops dead the Gaming and HiJacking that many of us Merchants have experenced by these unscrupulous ppl (be they competitors, griefers, or ppl with an Ax to grind on a Merchant). __________________________ Okey dokey, I was just on Skype with Rodvik, and I have arranged so that from now on, no one can leave a rating below 3 unless he reveals his name. You may thank me with generous donations. just kidding, couldn't resist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Vandeverre Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 I think that you can actually get him on the twitter phone if you attach every single stark raving lunatic tweet with his twitter handle. Next time....perhaps a re-organization of the building components category? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pamela Galli Posted August 10, 2011 Author Share Posted August 10, 2011 bump -- vote if you think it not fair to give negative reviews for non deliveries Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashasekayi Ra Posted August 10, 2011 Share Posted August 10, 2011 +1 Vote for the jira I agree that the review system should be scraped since it is so ineffective. But, I think the changes in the jira would at least be helpful since I doubt the review system will ever go away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pamela Galli Posted September 1, 2011 Author Share Posted September 1, 2011 Oh and be aware of this -- I found a "I didn't get this" review from someone whose delivery "expired", he was not charged, I was not paid. So he never actually bought the house but was able to review it! And he reviewed it well after the delivery expired, not during some window where it was still in limbo. So in aggregate all this must be taking a lot of merchant and commerce team time to deal with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now