Puppy Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 This is going to ruin sales for all of the talented content creators that make high quality items on Second Life. Nearly all of the top results for any keyword combination in the beta search bring up lower quality items. This is going to ruin my income. All this is going to do is create spammy titles with bad search results. The titles in the beta have WAY too much weight. The first thing I am going to have to do to maintain my real life income is rename things from "Sexy Jeans" to "(Brand) Rigged Mesh Sexy Skinny Jeans Pants Denim White Blue Black", even though the pack might also contain red, brown, pink and green. So anyone looking for green jeans won't be able to even see my item in search. It shouldn't be like this. What we SHOULD be doing is punishing creators that spam keywords, for every instance of keyword spam reported, take the item down for 1 week, no warnings. That would fix the problem and teach the spammers a lesson without punishing the people that have a lot of legitimate keywords for items that are too complicated to describe in the title. I can tell you right now, this is going to chase away a lot of talented content creators, as they are going to have to get day jobs, they won't have time to mess around with Second Life anymore. In addition, I think LL will be making a lot less money from the Marketplace, as people will get frustrated sorting through the pages and pages of low quality items and just close the window. People have a lot less patience than you think. There has to be a better solution to this problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trinity Yazimoto Posted February 26, 2016 Share Posted February 26, 2016 Sorry if this has been reported yet, but i dont feel like reading the whole thread right now. Yesterday after reading another threadh about the new beta website, i checked my store out of curiosity. So in the beta MP website, if i filter my MP store by relevance, i see on the 3 first page some old listings (one of my firsts 6 years ago) reappearing althought i have deleted them years ago. Those listing have, of course (but not that "of course" like that, as you will see in the following) no pic displayed, no price and lead to the MP homepage. Even like this i do not want that on my MP store pages ! I try to make my store the clearest i can, i delete often old items for it remains updated and no, thank you, i dont want mess done by other ppl. Now the best part, if you remember the mess we got when direct delivery started and that some of us, got for more than one year, pics not ours attached to some of our items. It took more than one year for having that fixed and was a big pain for merchants, like me, who try to make things at their best. So in page 3 of the new beta MP website, ....get ready.... what do i see ? one of the items i deleted years ago attached to one of those pics that are no mine, again. Yes... again. Like the bug is back and the MP is supposed to be improved with new system, but well we are back with bugs from 2 years ago. So well, can someone from the team tell me smth about that and when this will be fixed ? Will i have to wait again, more than one year for this to be fixed ? Thank you in advance for your answer and thank you even more if you fix that right away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Serge Narayan Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 Puppy: I beg to differ. The new beta may not be perfect and has its own set of issues, but it is still by far a great improvement from the current one. Try searching for "shooting stars" for example on the current search and you ll see what I mean. Many have complaint about the complete lack of relevance in the current search, which seem to return ridiculously irrelevant results for most search terms. Ever since the change LL made back then a lot of merchants have experienced a huge drop of sales. (See this thread: https://community.secondlife.com/t5/Merchants/Sales-Dead/td-p/740317 for reference) IMHO LL is on the right direction and kudos for that. My only comment is that the order of items listed on any merchant store page seem to have a strange order. I still havent figured out what algorithm it follows but it is definitely strange. Perhaps you could look into it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trinity Yazimoto Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 The bug still remains for 2 items deleted for years and still reappearing on my beta store. ALSO , i have 28 pages of listing, and in the beta i see only 25 pages, the amount of items is not the same and im missing 49 items on the beta website. Can someone tell me where did my items go ? They have not been unlisted bec they are still available on the normal MP ? So what does that mean ? (will open a jira for both bugs later today after RL work) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trinity Yazimoto Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 Just created a jira about old deleted items relisted. https://jira.secondlife.com/browse/BUG-11477 If you notice old deleted items coming back to your store in the beta version, please add comments in that one. Thank you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trinity Yazimoto Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 Also check your ammount of item listed in both version. i have 51 items missing in mine in the beta version . So here is a jira for that one, comment if you have same problem . https://jira.secondlife.com/browse/BUG-11478 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poopelsa Posted February 28, 2016 Share Posted February 28, 2016 I am sorry, but with all due respect you are objectively wrong. The search algorhythm in it's current state is the most bandaid solution they could have possibly come up with. It appears to score the words used in the title of the product far higher than anything else for relevancy of the product. Yes this means as of right now it does show relevant products if you search terms like "Shooting star", but it is also incredibly easy to exploit and those shady kind of dealers will simply put a word salad into their product titles and burry the good products beneath them. To give you a very concrete example: I have conducted a little experiment. After noticing how my sales for a bikini I made has gone a bit stale in the last few days. I looked into the cause of this and found that on the beta search it had fallen into obscurity on page 5 and beneath on relevant search terms. The product in question is a bikini specifically made for the Kemono body and thus should show up on page 1 or 2 if you search "Kemono bikini", And in the old search engine it did and still does. I noticed that crappy items that contained the word Kemono and bikini right in that order got a higher ranking however, so what I did was add the term "Kemono" infront of bikini in my product title and wouldn't you know it. It sits comfortably at the very top of the listing right now. Now my product name is still a legitimate one (altough redundant because it is listed in multiple places what body this bikini is for), but other people could very easily abuse this more than obvious flaw in the alghorhythm and it should not even be presented on the marketplace in it's current state, as it is utmost unusable and broken and I hope LL does not plan on replacing the old system with this even more broken one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Serge Narayan Posted February 28, 2016 Share Posted February 28, 2016 Firstly i assume Poopelsa is Puppy logged in using an alt's account. Below is my reply to you based on your last comment: I think the issue here is not so much if your product is making the front page or not, but whether the search will return relevant items based on the search terms. I have tried searching for "kemono bikini" like you said and all of the results appearing on the first page is relevant (bikini for Kemono) and IMO I dont think they are of lower quality like you described anyway. On the other hand, try seaching for the same term in the current search, and it does not take an observant person to realize that half the results are only derivations of the term bikini (namely panties, undies etc.), which is not as relevant. Would you go to the department store to shop for bikini and ended up buying panties instead? Hopefully not (no puns intended). In any case, why would any normal person selling non kemono bikini bother to put "kemono bikini" into their product title? Even if it makes them appearing first, the chance of it leading to any sales is close to none. Eventually those sellers will have to readjust their title if they want to make sales. LL cant really control what all people put into their title text. And in my years of doing SEO, what I have learned is that the relevance of the search term to the title meta tag is one of the most important criteria used by google search engine. So what is so wrong in placing importance on the title text? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lindens Grumpity Linden Posted March 1, 2016 Lindens Share Posted March 1, 2016 We believe this issue has been addressed. All, please let us know if you are seeing old removed listings creep up again on the Beta. Thank you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trinity Yazimoto Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 Hello Grumpity, thank you really much for having fixed this bug really fast. yes it looks like its been fixed now. However, one of the listing i listed on sunday, is not appearing now in the beta version of the website. The second listing, is appearing. https://marketplace.secondlife.com/p/PC-Vision-gown-headpiece/8623739 Ive pointed this in the jira aswell. So as soon you can do it, please, give a look to this. I got 51 items missing in the beta some days ago, and it's been fixed fast. So maybe its again this bug reappearing. The fix doesnt look stable, imho but maybe its inherent to the fact its beta only. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Puppy Posted March 18, 2016 Share Posted March 18, 2016 I am not Poopelsa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustinMichael Torok Posted April 19, 2016 Share Posted April 19, 2016 I'm not sure the "Best Selling" order is working 100% properly. For example, searching for "Cherry Tree" and organizing by "Best Selling" returns many expensive, low-review items above cheaper, highly-reviewed items. Since I can't see actual sales data, I could be wrong, but it seems odd that poorly rated expensive items would sell much more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whirly Fizzle Posted April 19, 2016 Share Posted April 19, 2016 There's a bug report for that at https://jira.secondlife.com/browse/BUG-10830 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stefan Buscaylet Posted April 27, 2016 Share Posted April 27, 2016 using keyword "photography" LUMIPRO is page 1, item 6 on the main browser (justified, 1000s of sales 100 five-star ratings). Using the beta LUMIPro is no where in the first 1000 entires (still not found it actually). These placement differences will kill so many businesses sales i filed a jira https://jira.secondlife.com/browse/BUG-11847 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mony Lindman Posted April 27, 2016 Share Posted April 27, 2016 Well, it's not right. You say that you "updated the formula to take prior sales data into account" but that doesn't seem to be the case. I have a very popular 3some FFM rug which was sold 2394 times ! on the Marketplace and used to show always in top 3 of searches for "3some". A search by Relevance for "3some" in the BETA version of the MP however, return this item on place 9 while on place 3 it's an ILLEGAL CLONE of it, sold by yet another copyboter, Mr. BradPitt Resident, who's whole MP shop consists of stolen items in "limited quantities". Apart from the fact that I will never understand why you continue to let such whole cloned shops exist and don't finally ban the cloners and all their alts permanently, in spite of repeated complants from all the affected creators, individually or as a group led by Casper Warden, even then, this clone should not appear in search in front of my original for the simple reason that it has by no means not even 1% of the numer of sales that my original has. This cloned item did not even exist on MP a few weeks ago (i search permanently for cloners) while mine is there since 4 years, a time when "Residents" also didn't even exist.. So what "updated formula" is that which returns such monstruosities of rankings ??? Mony Lindman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arwen Serpente Posted April 27, 2016 Share Posted April 27, 2016 Whirly Fizzle wrote: Arwen Serpente wrote: - For some reason, the "beta" website only shows 585 of my products when I use the "my store" drop down from "My Marketplace", or "visit this store" from a listing. This may or may not have anything to do with the beta search engine, but it's rather annoying to have 588 products listed and active, and have 3 go missing in the Beta. Where are they? This is happening to a lot of stores, though not all. I filed a bug report for that here: BUG-10769 - [sLM Beta Search] Some store pages have missing listings when using beta search This glitch - the beta showing a different number of items in a store vs. the actual store on the current MP - still exists, hasn't changed. I went to comment on the JIRA, but it is closed as "unactionable". Any ideas what we are supposed to do, or, is it really going to be left unsolved? p.s. Whirly, I'm replying to your post because you had replied to mine way back in Nov 2015, trying to keep the subject organized. The comment is really directed at the LL team coding the beta. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mony Lindman Posted April 27, 2016 Share Posted April 27, 2016 Correction to the above message. The name of the cloner is BraddPittt probably because his previous alt names with 1 and 2 "t" at the end have been already removed by you from MP .. I can understand that you can't keep up with these suckers comming up with the same stolen products again and again but .. I can not understand why they show on top of the search if the search as you say "takes prior sales data into account" Mony Lindman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arwen Serpente Posted April 27, 2016 Share Posted April 27, 2016 As comments at the beginning of this thread indicated, the "Best Selling" sort for an individual store was not functioning well. It still does not function well - perhaps the first 9 or 10 items are recently sold, but then it degenerates into a muddle of slow sellers, with best sellers mixed in somewhere at the end. The "Relevence" sort functions better to show what is most recently selling well. I say this for an individual store, not for searching a term in general - other posts have already pointed out that searching a general term is not necessarily providing expected results. Since I'm not seeing much change from the end of 2015 to now, and I know you've been working on it, I have to ask, what changes were made? Are improvements still in progress? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pamela Galli Posted April 27, 2016 Share Posted April 27, 2016 As usual they roll out some "beta" they produced with little to no user input, ask for feedback, then fall silent, so we have no idea if they are working on it at all anymore. Esp when they just close JIRAs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darrius Gothly Posted April 27, 2016 Share Posted April 27, 2016 Speaking purely theoretically technologically: It would appear they are calculating a rating based on "Purchases per View". In other words, how many times a purchase was made after the item was viewed. The obvious problem with this calculation is that copybotted products .. always priced way below the original products they are copied from .. will sell at a very high rate per view. The original products will always have a lower sales rate. I may be wrong, but just thinking "inside the box" .. this is what appears to be happening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whirly Fizzle Posted April 27, 2016 Share Posted April 27, 2016 Arwen Serpente wrote: Whirly Fizzle wrote: Arwen Serpente wrote: - For some reason, the "beta" website only shows 585 of my products when I use the "my store" drop down from "My Marketplace", or "visit this store" from a listing. This may or may not have anything to do with the beta search engine, but it's rather annoying to have 588 products listed and active, and have 3 go missing in the Beta. Where are they? This is happening to a lot of stores, though not all. I filed a bug report for that here: BUG-10769 - [sLM Beta Search] Some store pages have missing listings when using beta search This glitch - the beta showing a different number of items in a store vs. the actual store on the current MP - still exists, hasn't changed. I went to comment on the JIRA, but it is closed as "unactionable". Any ideas what we are supposed to do, or, is it really going to be left unsolved? p.s. Whirly, I'm replying to your post because you had replied to mine way back in Nov 2105, trying to keep the subject organized. The comment is really directed at the LL team coding the beta. Best thing to do is to file a new JIRA issue about the missing store items when using beta search. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingered Alsop Posted May 30, 2016 Share Posted May 30, 2016 I have tried the new beta market search and really like the boolean operators, these are my suggestions: have a checkbox that forces the keyword search to always use "AND" between keywords Enable some way to search just the titles of items. Perhaps a checkbox or maybe quotes around the words. Add a new sort option that allows us to sort by vendor. Instead of showing us individual items, tell us how many items by that vendor match our criteria and sort descending ... this way we can go to the vendors with the most selection for the criteria we specify. When searching with boolean search criteria, clicking a vendor, that search criteria is carried forward to the vendor when searching their inventory. This why we don't have to backup, grab the criteria and move forward again. It would be nice to be able to mark a vendor as a favorite. I know you can mark outfits as favourites, but what I'd like to do is find vendors with things that are new in the past month from my favourites. It would be nice if there was a way to filter by date ... as in the outfit/object was added/updated in the past week, 2 weeks, past month, 3 months, year, etc. In conjunction with the previous suggestion, this would make it possible to find all new things by our favourite vendors in the past month, for example. Ginger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THEHERO Snowfall Posted September 9, 2016 Share Posted September 9, 2016 Can u see my last two support case... can u fix the problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luna Datura Posted September 11, 2016 Share Posted September 11, 2016 ive been gone for a few months and noticed the market place is sooo slow with page loads . then my trail for answers lead me here. so this is suppose to be faster? well its not. thats my take on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whirly Fizzle Posted September 11, 2016 Share Posted September 11, 2016 Are you using Internet Explorer 11? There's a known bug that causes slow searches on the market place when using IE11. If you switch to a different web browser (Firefox or Chrome) then you won't have a problem. For details see BUG-20059 - Marketplace search fails using IE11 with Microsoft Update MS16-063 (KB3160005) installed 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.
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now