[SL's "Better Business"]

16 hours ago, RowanMinx said:

You quoted my post and then went on as if saying what I posted was incorrect.

I was trying to explain to the OP why the person from SL secrets (now virtual secrets) was banned.  Not for posting IMs but for using SL in her website name.  I certainly know posting IMs inworld or on any LL owned forum or blog is against ToS

I apologize if I took want you said as disagreeing with what I originally posted.  But it came off that way to me.  

I understood it just fine, honestly. They broke the TOS for the name of it. Which is probably going to happen with this one.

[SL's "Better Business"]

7 hours ago, Janet Voxel said:

I mean...there are good business practices. Thing is, a lot of people just don't follow them in SL and a lot of times people applaud the bad ones. It really should be expected, because most people on SL aren't business people, it's just someone who makes things on their PC and most people just do what other people are doing or what "works" which usually has nothing to do with good business practice.

You'd be surprised how many creators just don't know how to do certain things. Couple that with people's high expectations and lack of knowledge about how certain things work and you get what you get. Since a lot of know-how isn't readily accessible, there are creators that just don't know how to do certain things. I bought a top that had a little poke through, so I im'd the creator for an alpha. In the meantime, I started making one. When they finally got back to me, they asked me to show them  what was wrong. So I did. Nothing, so I went ahead and make the alpha and sent it to them. When I was done, they im'd me...."How did you make that?" So this person, knew how to model, rig and texture, but didn't know how to make an alpha. So I told them, then I passed them a video. Things like this are normal and happen all the time.

I'm a creator, yes, I know there's plenty that have no clue how to do things. That really isn't their fault, though as there's no real "standard" that the community shares, they have to learn the hard way. Especially when it comes to meshing, there are countless creators who have no clue how to model correctly, and create something that doesn't lag their customers. I could go on tangents on how fellow creators just don't know 'some things' that should be common among us.

But that's why I don't like the idea of some random person giving creators hell for something that they might not understand, like the whole 'customer is always right.'

 

[SL's "Better Business"]

5 hours ago, Marianne Little said:

I have objections to most of it. "Altered ad photos or that do not look like their ad".

If I buy a RL dress with some supermodel in the ad, the dress will not look the same on me. In RL, designers does not go to the Wal-Mart parking and ask a random customer to model it on the spot. Even if that is true to the reality. In RL, they use a model with the right light and makeup in a studio.

So in SL, buyers can put on the item in default midday light and say "It does not look like the ad!" It is demanding stricter rules on Secondlife marketing than RL marketing.

"Untimely response". Most SL sellers are doing this as a hobby, it is not enough to live of. And they can't hire a manager, office assistant or CEO to answer questions 24/7. Who decides what "untimely" is?

How are the "BB" going to verify an item is defective/broken? They are going to buy it? We know a lot of malfunction is due to the customer's ignorance. Saying it does not work can not be enough proof.

How are the seller going to come clean if they are made to look like a villain due to uninformed people, altered chat logs or prejudice?

For me it sounds like this avatar behind it, is going to be the sole judge. Why trust an unknown avatar that's just popped up? And think she is objective and always right? I am more likely to believe she's an alt out to stir up things.

All of this. Completely, and I really think that myself.

 

Someone mentioned the "no Demo" thing being a problem, and that was one that set off red-flags for me, too. Not EVERYTHING needs a demo. Clothing, mesh attachments, sure. Sometimes skins too, to make sure certain things are in the 'right place.' But textures? Scripts? Sounds?? How do demo those?

 

This is clearly just going to be someone who is going to use it as an excuse to hate on creators who don't fit into their standards, which THEIR STANDARDS, are clearly not "SL standards." Because standards on SL doesn't exist. People do what they want to do, that's what makes SL so great for creators.

[SL's "Better Business"]

1 minute ago, Solar Legion said:

Shared within Second Life or shared outside of it?

The former is actually against ToS.

I don't remember at this point, but I believe it was outside. Could have been either or, though, at the time I was security for a sim. Like I said though, this was over a decade ago.

[SL's "Better Business"]

Just now, Solar Legion said:

Warning, suspension .... The point being that such should not have been given at all.

And that makes me question, cause I got it over logs being shared, the other had something like "your account was suspended due to harmful activity" or something to that effect.

 

So now that I know it's not against the ToS, I wonder why I got it.

[SL's "Better Business"]

1 minute ago, Solar Legion said:

.... It was never against the ToS to share chat logs and such outside of Second Life. If you were suspended after doing so, there were other reasons for your suspension. Any Linden that would list such as the "reason" behind such an action back then was taking action on something wholly out of the scope of the ToS.

Now how do I know this? I've shared logs externally countless times before and also tried to report one or two malignant bloggers/users for using their logs to harass or ***** talk other users.

No actions were ever taken.

I was never suspended, it was a warning, for sharing logs. The only time I was 'ever' suspended was someone hijacked my account while I was on hiatus. And I never even knew it was hijacked until months later.

[SL's "Better Business"]

1 minute ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

lol

Well, speaking as a card-carrying SJW . . . that term, "White Knight"? You're using it wrong. A White Knight is someone who, unasked and uninvited, more or less hijacks someone else's grievance as a way of virtue signalling, or just being a pain in the ass.

This person is not seeking out merchants, but rather waiting to be contact by disgruntled consumers. In other words, they are providing a service -- apparently for free. It's not at all the same thing as "White Knighting."

I don't see anything in their language to suggest that they are being "crazy internet warriors," or that their motives are particularly suspect. You might, of course, be correct -- I don't know this person. But neither do you. What are you basing that on?

Okay so I'm using the term wrong, thank you for clarifying.

As for why I think it's a bad idea is it's not, for one, apart of Linden Labs, and 2 the single use of "Blasting them. Period" comment. They have no real means to force the merchant's hand other than harassing them and "slandering" their name. The point of a BBB is to report being screwed over by a business and then the BBB actually having the power to do something about it.

These people and/or person lacks any sort of power due to them NOT being associated with LLs.

[SL's "Better Business"]

3 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

Again, yes -- there's that danger.

I've talked about something like this in the past, and one of the things that I stipulated, and that is absolutely vital is that the process / investigation be transparent. It's not clear that any of this process will be . . . the more I read this, the less it looks like a sort of "better business" thing, and the more like vigilantism -- which, I'll agree, is not good.

But it does look as though the intent is a good one: they've said

• That they require proof of a deficiency in goods or services
• That they will contact the merchant to hear their side of the story
• That they will try to mediate a resolution between merchant and consumer before taking further action.

Now, to that I'd add:

• That they will, when appropriate, test deficient goods or services themselves to ascertain the validity of the complaint
• That they render the entire process transparent (i.e., public)
• And, importantly, that the "action" they take is simply to provide a kind of online database of problems that they have, to a reasonable degree, ascertained are valid and legitimate complaints. "Blasting" someone isn't going to help anyone.

And all of this assumes that they are in fact going to follow their own procedures. If they don't, then it is certainly bound to become a waste of time and possibly as stupid and useless as Virtual Secrets.

I'd like to hear from them, tbh.

I'd like to as well. Because they're treading a fine line, here. I do hope that I'm just worried for nothing, I would prefer to be wrong in these situations, but there's just to many things that point to otherwise.

 

EDIT: whoops, sorry didn't realize this would double post. I don't use these forums very often.

[SL's "Better Business"]

3 minutes ago, RowanMinx said:

Disclosing private Second Life conversations

Sharing or posting a conversation inworld or in the Second Life forums without consent of all involved Residents is a violation of the Terms of Service.

NOTE: This does not include posting of chat to social media sites or other websites. Posting such logs on web pages, emailing them, or printing them out and posting them on utility poles in the "real world" -- are all actions beyond the scope of the Second Life Terms of Service. ; while that might be illegal, but those laws must be enforced by the proper law enforcement agencies.

Ah hah, so it is different now, thank you for clarifying that. I was under the impression it was still just "you can't share logs period!" as it was over 7ish years ago. I always did find that silly, how were they going to enforce that? So thank you for that.

That said, there are plenty of people who share logs IN SL, as well, which breaks the TOS. This person could get themselves and the 'customer' they're trying to help in trouble for that, if they aren't privy to that.

More over, I just would like folks to be aware this is something that some unknown person is trying to start, and it doesn't look like they're in it for any other reason than to be the White Knight. The wording they use is very akin to that of an SJW or other crazy Internet "Warrior," and it will only end poorly for all sides.

[SL's "Better Business"]

1 minute ago, RowanMinx said:

Warnings from who?  It is NOT against ToS to.post chat logs on non LL.websites.  

I do see.good intentions behind a site like this but unless they research each and every complaint thoroughly, it will just end up Virtual Secrets 2.0

You can get warnings from LLs via Emails. That's how they usually handle the 'minor' offenses, like sharing logs. As for sharing outside, that must be something that ended up getting changed, cause this was over a decade ago I got that warning.

I wish I could see good intentions, but having dealt with "White Knights" in the past, I already see this as someone using it as an excuse to harass people.

 

If none of this violates the TOS now, harassing creators will be. Because there's multiple reasons why a creator simply wouldn't talk to a customer, via their own volition (which they have a right to,) or various issues involving technology (Capped IMs, for example,) and I just simply don't think this is something SL needs and wish to bring awareness of how bad this could go. This person, (it seems to be one person,) could easily be biased with very little info or do nothing but make the situation worse. And even if they are doing it for the betterment of customers in SL, how exactly are they going to handle a creator who just simply mutes them? What are they going to do? Spread 'awareness' by slandering the creator's name? Which, again, is ALSO against the TOS? (Slandering, I mean,) so... it's not going to do anything but cause issues.

[SL's "Better Business"]

2 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

Well, they ask, as you say, for screenshots and logs. I'm not sure that's sufficient to prove something actually doesn't do what it says it is supposed to do . . . I think they should examine it themselves. But, they do seem to be trying to establish the legitimacy of the complaint. In other words, they aren't simply taking a disgruntled customer's word for it.

No, it is not. Not so long as it is not on LL's platform.

Do you have any idea how many blogs and web sites include screenshots and conversation logs? Check out Virtual Secrets, for a start. (On second thought, don't. It's really really stupid.)

Not how I would handle it, I'll confess. I'd just make it public. But, again, it's not against the ToS unless it is actually happening on one of LL's platforms.

You mean logs would have to be like in a notecard? Cause I've gotten warnings in the past for sharing them outside of SL. Which is why I don't share logs anymore.

 

3 minutes ago, Bitterthorn said:

I can't really speak to if this breaks the TOS, but regardless of intentions of the folks starting this I don't see this ending well. I just see it being an avenue of harassment like some other confession websites are. 

That's my issue with this. Nothing good will come of this, it will be only for harassment purposes. Creators have a hard enough time with people who refuse to read the instructions and get crap in IMs for this stuff, let alone someone taking a complaint into their own hands and "Blasting them" for it.

[SL's "Better Business"]

Just now, Scylla Rhiadra said:

Well, first, this doesn't break the ToS.

Second, how is this not legal?

Third, it looks like they are making real attempts to validate complaints, reach out to the creators, and help resolve issues between merchants and consumers. So, assuming that they are actually doing this (and do you know for a fact that they aren't?), your problem with it is  . . . ???

How would you provide proof of failure to them? You would have to provide logs or screenshots of conversation- Which is against the TOS.

My problem is this person was seen in this screenshot, which was linked in a the Kinzart Community discord server with the link (I forgot it on the first post, sorry);

My problem is they will do nothing but harass creators, as shown here. "I'm blasting them." That is "I'm going to white knight them!" Which goes against the TOS, as that is harassment.

[SL's "Better Business"]

If this caught your attention, it should.

https://www.instagram.com/slbb.sl/

These folks, are attempting to not only break the TOS, but also harass creators on Second Life that don't hold up to their standards, as evident with the pictures involved. I want to point these guys out because at NO POINT, is this even legal or something that should be used. I don't know how else to report them, as they don't actually have a name attached, but they operate out of this website: https://linktr.ee/secondlifebetterbusiness/

[Death Threats sent to specific creators]

so this will take some explaining. Many people know of the Dawn Kingdom's creator, Wanders Nowhere, had, a few years ago, released a dragon avatar. This dragon is a full sized, massively interactive beast that has practically a cult following... However...

There are certain group of people who, as of the time I post this, have moved from one creator to another, sending death threats and other forms of harassment over creators of Dragon avatars. While I am NOT the creator of any of these avatars, I have beta tested for a few of the avatar makers and worked closely with them on their projects.

What I'm after is no easy feat, for sure, but I have names and I want to know what can be done about this. These people have driven off several creators already, and it's getting so bad that creators are starting to question their own sanity, (the one specifically, I will not name, but it took me and five others to beg him not to leave SL, let alone off himself.) None of these creators were even in the mindset I should AR these people, but now that it's come to light, how do we deal with it? I'd imagine there's not a lot that can be done outside the creator ARing them, but any kind of advice for these awesome creators would be helpful.

The targeted creators have been Wanders Nowhere of Dawn Kingdoms, https://marketplace.secondlife.com/stores/31607

Dreamcrawler of Dreamcrawler Creations, https://marketplace.secondlife.com/stores/2339

Tethis String of I, Monster, https://marketplace.secondlife.com/stores/36764

rancorwilds  of Dragons Arise https://marketplace.secondlife.com/stores/223841

with Tornleaf of Red Remora being one of the unfortunate to have been bullied off of SL: https://marketplace.secondlife.com/stores/170063

 

I'm sorry if this seems like I'm wanting to cause issues. But I'm trying to help these creators who are at their wits end. Ignoring these terrible people are just not working and instead they're coming back with death threats when they are ignored on alts.

Apparently this started with horse creators first, over dragons. I'm not apart of that community or I'd drop store creators.

[Abuse by Linden Employee]

I've been following this for some time, as well. I own Magican Productions. The fact that "furry" must be separated from SL standards and only get one to two categories is frankly rude as hell, imho, because you have like... 5 fantasy categories?

But I digress, this is a new situation. We've been seeing flags (And by We, I mean VesperBloodwing and I, as we both work on the same creator team) for things that just keep coming through. There is NOTHING that seems to make either party happy and it's very detrimental to our businesses and extremely discouraging as a content creator.

We want this stopped. This is blatant harassment and since we have no idea who is doing it, we can't just report the person directly for it. This must be looked at by the Lindens themselves.