| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Jamo 
Joined: 20 Apr 2007
Posts: 12770
Location: United Kingdom
|
 Posted: Mon Oct 10, 2011 12:25 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Wait, just clear something up first.
Can we be banned if we dont pay these fines?
when infact, we did nothing wrong and it was completely out of our control.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Cappy
Joined: 25 Mar 2007
Posts: 7596
Location: United Kingdom
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 10, 2011 12:26 pm Post subject: Re: Change to the way re-rated products and refunds are hand |
|
|
| Varsha wrote: | Effective immediately, we have made a change to the way refunds are handled for re-rated products.
Previously, when a product was re-rated causing it to be taken away from customers and refund to be issued to that customer, only the creator of the final product was affected. His/her profits were deducted from the credit balance as part of the refund process. Creators of products in the derivation chain of that re-rated product got to keep any earned profits for such purchases.
As of now, this is no longer the case. When a product is re-rated and its transactions are reversed, all profits in the derivation chain will be deducted from the corresponding creator's credit balance.
The credits will be deducted from the pended or delivered credit balances depending on where credits from each transaction are at the time of the refund. Re-rated products will be taken out of the inventory of customers as always.
All affected creators will get a notification when refund is processed for a re-rated product.
Updated FAQs for this change are available here.
Thank you. |
Varsha, thanks for the heads up.
Can we please have some protection from derivers misrating products?
I propose:
- Our profits are only removed IF they are still in pend.
- Any profits earnt that are no longer in pend are not removed, as this could cause us to have a negative balance.
_________________
| AnakaTarren wrote: | | Safety message: Never take candy or gifts from strangers, especially if they are red-nosed, lemurs with Vixen written on their collars! |
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SilentBabble
Joined: 01 Jan 2007
Posts: 5986
Location: USA - NY
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 10, 2011 12:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think its a step in the right direction. 
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
princemonstrositys
Joined: 11 Aug 2008
Posts: 1222
Location: USA - FL
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 10, 2011 12:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
devs will not purchase credits anymore we are far beyond that .I made a gbraph of the past 6 months and reports sales are down as a whole well over three quarters of 100 percent so sales right now as i see it in my reports as only 25 percent as a whole its seriously bad right now and if it continues we are in serious troubble im not passing rumors im only posting what my report and the online reporting data states when compared togetner .but im doing the best i can here as i love this place to develope and make my art .
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sikk
Joined: 26 Oct 2005
Posts: 11575
Location: USA - AZ
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 10, 2011 12:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Is this in part due to the fact that you won't bother to credpend derive fees?
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
princemonstrositys
Joined: 11 Aug 2008
Posts: 1222
Location: USA - FL
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 10, 2011 12:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Cassiopeia wrote: | I don't agree with this at all. Why should I, as a mesher, have my income taken away from me because someone else has made a wrongly rated product without my knowledge.
If this is the case I want to be notified of every derivation so that I can approve them, and if they don't meet my approval they must be pulled.
I should not be penalised for something I have no control over or say in. |
LOL Cass its almost like a kid pulling a scam saying that they have 50 foster Children and collecting money from every family but come down to it they are the child of someone from another state .I really wonder what the people at imvu are doing to think of these crazy ideas from .is it that the company isn't doing well so they need our income cause i have none at all and i think most people here are either broke or on disability or child support .at least 80 percent of the developers here are on fixed income .and own no assets i'm completely puzzled by this . did this 2 week pen cost them all there investors ? it sure sounds fishy .i'm not trying to talk about something i do not know about but something is going wrong .did they sell the company ? Will someone from staff PLEASE LET US KNOW THE REAL STANDING OF THE IMVU COMPANY AND NOT SOME GARBLED ANSWER THE TRUTH FOR ONE TIME ION YOUR LIFE PLEASE we need to make arrangements to in our lives.sorry for so many questions but its evident that something terrible is happening to imvu as we know it .
_________________
Last edited by princemonstrositys on Mon Oct 10, 2011 1:34 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
IIxSHAExII 
Joined: 11 Nov 2008
Posts: 69
Location: United Kingdom
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 10, 2011 12:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ok first off i hate this. Due to the fact that products can actually get re-rated due to catalog pictures and info pages. So if a person derives my mesh and makes an innapropriate catalog icon and/or info page i am going to have to pay people back for THIER mistakes? I totaly think IMVU should stop all this to begin with by properly peering the products and also check the flagged ones and the parent product in advance to taking action on people by removing the products forcing credits to be paid back. I have just had a product this has been done to, it's been re-rated to AP even though i got IMVU to check it before i made it GA to make sure it was suitable for GA and it was found to be GA but yet i have just had to refund so far 90,000 credits. Also wow this got me, cos i have more than one account they have said that this product was derived from one of my other accounts and they have made me pay also from that account. Funny thing is IT WAS NOT DERIVED FROM ANY PRODUCT ON THAT ACCOUNT. So i suggest people keep an ye on thier other accounts. I think check the flagged product before taking action and check the parent product too. If only the derived product is braking the "rules" then make them pay back every credits the product costs!! NOT THE MESHER. Seriouslt don't punish us meshers for things such as catalog icons ect. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Relle
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
Posts: 321
Location: Australia
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 10, 2011 12:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Why should a mesher have to police who derives from them just to preserve their credits/account?
I can see the reasoning behind it (trying to discourage all the ufi/black market items made on purpose) but there will be a lot of innocent meshers caught out with this and it's something not in their control.
Credit Pend is meant to catch these items, so I agree with Cappy that refunds for parent meshes should only come out of 'funds' held in Credit Pend - after pend is over, the parent mesh refund is cut off.
Having said that, the parent mesh should immediately be reviewed when an item is re-rated to assess it's suitability.
_________________
Click here to check out my catalog!
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Defenitiv
Joined: 11 Oct 2007
Posts: 33
Location: USA - NC
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 10, 2011 12:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| im lost as usual cause its so many changes on this site I can never keep up, but what if somone derives an ap item from a mesher but they set the item as general audiences in their catalog, how is that the meshers fault ? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tidy
Joined: 25 Nov 2006
Posts: 4564
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 10, 2011 12:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I agree with Cass, If I stand the risk of losing credits for someone else's scam than I want control over my derives.
Meshers don't have the right to change prices so IMVU can protect the derivers.
We give up all rights to the mesh and the textures on the items so anyone can use them.
It's unfair for meshers to have to eat the cost of scammers making GA nude skins and all the UFI and AP rerating as well.
It's wrong for us to eat this cost when its the deriver with all the rights.
I get to eat it now for unethical derivers. Nice......
T
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
s4F_disabled_12416706
Joined: 05 May 2007
Posts: 2332
Location: Indonesia
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 10, 2011 12:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
its not always about something wrong with parent products but its ALWAYS something wrong with products derived FROM those products.
so u got money from something wrong... u should return them back... why u wanna keep them?..
_________________
fun stuff inside |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sikk
Joined: 26 Oct 2005
Posts: 11575
Location: USA - AZ
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 10, 2011 1:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I can see both sides of this.
On one hand, you have lots of clothing meshers who make their meshes in good faith.
On the other hand, I can go into the catalog with an mcg skin and flag hundreds of products that fail on any given day, and the meshers have been earning credits on every one of those items since the mcg guidelines were put in place.
I do think that any mesher who ends up with a negative balance due to a refund should be exempted from the possibility of disablement due to negative balance, unless the parent product is in violation itself.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DopeRolling_disabled_4271
Joined: 02 Nov 2009
Posts: 24
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 10, 2011 1:06 pm Post subject: smh always something |
|
|
well first we deal with credit pending now this.
well what is imvu gonna do if a creator cant pay do they disable their account?
_________________
welcome to my page feel free to request custom tattoos an put my banner on ur hp thanks for the visit |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sprnova
Joined: 23 Feb 2007
Posts: 50
Location: USA - CO
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 10, 2011 1:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Um....
I really dont see how this is to benefit developers. I have plenty of meshes in the catalog. one of which is in the #1 slot in 1 category, I sell nearly 600 a day and has over 750 derived items. I spend a lot of my time doing damage control on just that one item to protect it from poachers who just copy and paste and call it their own.
Developers are Now having credits deducted just because SOMEONE derives their item and miss rates the item either by accident or on purpose. I would have to call this Theft.
I Personally Have No Control Over What Other Developers Do To My Meshes. I Cannot Be Accountable By Their Actions.
I THOUGHT THE 'WHOLE PEER REVIEW' THING WAS TO CORRECT THIS?
So now if I "police" my derived items and flag them and they get re-rated, I also will have to pay back what is owned? DUR
Peer Review = FAIL
Credit Pend = FAIL
Re-rated Policy = FAIL
_________________
If you do not lead, you must follow |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sikk
Joined: 26 Oct 2005
Posts: 11575
Location: USA - AZ
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 10, 2011 1:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| sprnova wrote: | Um....
I really dont see how this is to benefit developers.
/snip/
Peer Review = FAIL
Credit Pend = FAIL
Re-rated Policy = FAIL |
None of these changes have been made to benefit developers
Benefiting devs doesn't seem to be in IMVU's best interest.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in for private messages