VF saidThanks, that’s what I guessed authors were looking for, and this thread has been great for me to understand the problems we need to solve. Did you imagine we’d do this by default on all comments, or as an alternative to flagging (author clicks a button to obscure URLs on a per-comment basis)?
This is example comment [private url obscured] to point how a link can be hidden while managing keep it legible similar to most professional sites doing already.
Thanks, the obvious expectation would be to hide urls by default. Because flagging & hiding will not solve the following issues:
- The author may not check the comment for 1 or 2 days after a buyer posts. These days, the urls will still be there and cause the discussed damage. This will allow room for those who depend on such links as free source.
- Still allows public view until flagged, for those without login.
sushipasta saidGreat point — I’ve been wondering what customer experiences we would be hindering. What are some specific downsides? What are some examples of legitimate URLs in comments we would be blocking? What are some specific negative experience we’d be trading-off against?
Don’t hinder the customer experience because of it.
The only downside I see is in case something not working on the buyer’s site due to the purchased item and the buyer wants to share this thing to other buyers, it wont be possible. From my experience as author, none or the buyers had such situation and each buyer wants to insert link only to point something privately to the author to get help or solve bug. No other reasons.
Regarding the legitimate links, we can safely assume every url is to point where the purchased item implemented which requires privacy (as obvious concern). Another possible case is buyer adding 3rd party links as example to show authors to request new features. This is a rare case and again buyer have no problems hiding to public as long as url reaches author.
Regarding the negative experience concern, consider the following scenario: It is already possible to report a comment that contains URL and those URLs usually removed by staff. We authors doing this for the past 4 or so years and none of the buyers complained about this, since they know they still get support/help but just the link removed. The same is true for default url hiding (as long as the original poster knows the url is visible to the item author and self).
And seriously the item comment section is not a community ‘sharing’ area. Always it is open for discussion, help, feedback, criticize about item while the url link is not something so obvious to have as “public” from both the author and buyer perspectives (atleast for the category of items which actually affected). Hope our points will be considered and of course we respect staff’s considerations since you have more data in hand than authors.
At the risk of sounding a cocky ass: i’ve been author here since 3y, gave support to more than 16k buyers amongst 3 different marketplace on 2 accounts and i never found a single url in comment area which was not :
- Broken example (99% buyer mistake), request for how to fix it.
- Link to competitor.
Seriously, are we still talking about this ? Just make every link private by default and nobody will cry for the loss.
First of all I think comments should be split in two sections, General and Support. (FAQ section should be removed)
1. On Support comments area only author and buyer can see posts. Other buyers can see only their comments they posted and replies connected to their comments from author in Support comments area.
2. On General section area all links should not be allowed and all is needed is pure text, smiles etc.
3. Who not purchased item he/she can’t comment in Support comments area.
Also in General comments area there is no need to be part (bar diagonal) where is written ‘purchased’ to clarify that author purchased item. That is General section and should be equal for all, no one cares is it purchased or not on General (chat) comments area where is mostly written ‘Good luck with sales’, ‘Awesome’, ‘I almost s**t when saw you theme’...LOL…and similar…With this system I personally would be very happy and that will help to solve all problems mentioned by other authors.
Just want to add, I’ve flagged a lot of links over the years and have never had a single customer complain about it. I post my usual generic message:
Hi (customer name), I flagged your post because I don’t like to have links to unobfuscated versions of the script in the comments but no worries.
And all they care about is that the rest of my message answers their question.
A theme may use a jQuery plugin found on GitHub. An urgent push is made that fixes several exploits. However for unknown reasons I don’t apply this fix. Several people read the comments to find a message like: “X has just updated Y that fixes Z, here’s the details: [link hidden]”
This can be easily solved by the author posting the link instead of the customer
In an ideal world yes, but perhaps the author is MIA .
An author should always be responsible for the products they sell, including all open source libraries they happen to use. If an author has abandoned support and the product ends up having problems (whether that involves open source code included in the project or not), the product should be disabled.
The point I’m getting at is there are dozens of reasons why an author may not be able to respond.
The answer is in my last post but I’ll say it again
If the author can’t actively support their products and the product ends up having a big problem, it needs to be disabled.