Suggestion Ability to remove buyers

Discussion in 'Community Feedback and Suggestions' started by Splodgebox, Jun 17, 2019.

?

Should this be implemented?

  1. Yes

    12 vote(s)
    28.6%
  2. No

    30 vote(s)
    71.4%
  1. Hello,
    I'm not sure if this has already been suggested before, It would be amazing if resource owners/developers could have the ability to remove buyers. This inclines more freedom and safety as when a user chargeback on a resource their access is removed but if they cancel it then their access is not added back so when you add the user back. If they chargeback afterwards paypal will not remove them (I think) resulting in them having the plugin no matter what.

    You are unable to remove buyers so it will just be a loss on your end.

    I understand why it's not a thing as it would just result in winny kids messaging staff complaining but I feel as if it would be a great addition.
    Along with the issue of users abusing this feature but then again buyers can chargeback if wrongfully removed.
     
    • Optimistic Optimistic x 2
    • Useful Useful x 1
  2. I voted no. Why you ask? Because this could be abused very easily.
    Piss a plugin dev off once, and then can remove you from their buyer list? No thank you!

    Then SpigotMC staff are going to get a ton of emails "Plugin dev A removed from their buyer list because I left a bad review" <-- I really don't think staff here are going to want to deal with this kind of stuff.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  3. Oh my bad xD
    Yh true
     
  4. Would rather see an ability to blacklist certain users from buying any of your resources.
     
    • Agree Agree x 10
    • Winner Winner x 1
  5. If they charge back, they're removed from the list. If they cancel it, they've already stated intention of charging back, so they shouldn't be added back imo. If you do choose to, however, they still can't chargeback because they only have 1 shot at it with PP.
     
  6. An extension to this - perhaps on option for a resource to be listed as manual approval only?
     
  7. electronicboy

    IRC Staff

    People already set up manual approvals on paypal for this, no idea how they do it, but I know that you can (or at least could)

    Cat and mouse, what stops me from just creating another account?

    if they charge back and you add them back, you're basically shooting yourself in the foot, refund the payment and make them pay again is going to be your best option, spigot can't really tie the purchase back to paypal when you added it manually it

    Overall the suggestion has been suggested countless of times after it was removed due to abuse, this is really a case of where the community decided to shoot itself in the foot and are now upset that they're having to limp around, spigot decided that the fallout of authors having such an ability created more drama for them than it solved.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. UPDATE: I don't want to create a whole other thread for this so I'm just going to place it here.
    I think us as content creators should have the ability to report unfair and clearly bias reviews.
    I have spent the past year building up a full 5 star review for all my plugins but a certain few people just leave 1 star reviews which are clearly out of spite.

    One was from a user who used leaked versions of my plugin so when confronted acted hostile and we banned him from our server then he bought my plugin just to leave a 1 star review.

    Another was from a user who was just being a complete moron. Wanting GUI customisability and giving a short time gap to add it in, when I got busy with work and life the user just left a bad review (Nothing was wrong with the plugin)
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  9. I completely agree, I've experienced a lot of users that use the reviews section as a way to "punish" us for not adding their feature suggestions. In my opinion, a bad review is only warranted if the developer is either rude, does not provide the advertised features, or leaves his/her plugin in terrible working condition.

    I think that reviews that pressure developers to add features that are not advertised, should be removed.
     
  10. Choco

    Moderator

    Sounds like a win to me. He bought your plugin. lol.

    There will be a day when resource authors realize reviews are entirely useless. Unless you have a resource that consists of mostly 1 stars, users will see past the obviously biased ones.
     
  11. I'm just wondering, why are we not able to report reviews that are unfair?
     
  12. Presumably because everyone is going to have an individual take on what constitutes a "fair review". I can imagine it would be a nightmare for moderation.
     
  13. True, even if spigot made official terms on what an "unfair" review is, it would still be a nightmare for them, cause some people would report every bad review they receive.

    Personally, I would report bad reviews that either contain bad language, spam, or feature requests that are not advertised. But then again, we would have to consider what constitutes as "unfair" regarding these 3 subjects, which would take too much work :ROFLMAO:.

    EDIT: I just considered right now that people would just revenge-review anyways, so that would have to be taken into account as well. Now I see there's no point in adding this.
     
    #14 BourneDev, Aug 14, 2019
    Last edited: Aug 14, 2019
  14. Choco

    Moderator

    Review reports did exist in the past but were removed because authors figured that anything less than 5 stars, although valid, was not truthful and had to be removed. Not sure when 3 or 4 stars were considered poor reviews but we're not going to waste our time validating whether or not something is true. It's been abused in the past, it would be abused if it were added again.

    Though again, and I cannot stress this enough
     
  15. I always encourage suggestions, but when a buyer leaves negative feedback based on a potential feature that's in their imagination, that's where I don't see the logic. I think it's the buyer's fault for feeling entitled to a feature that is not advertised.

    Yeah, seems like more effort to me. You're right, too much effort when most of the time negative reviews don't have that much of a purpose anyways.