Death

Could you provide the link to the file you're referring to?

For context:

Please have a look at our How to Submit a File guide to get started.

This was my bad. I had removed the only way for our moderators to see pending reviews while I was working on a new portal. It should be approved now or, at the very least, received a message from the team.

The author is no longer active so I've gone ahead and issued a refund into account credit.

The author is no longer active. I've gone ahead and issued a refund into account credit.

@Cobalt Studios

@Cobalt Studios

@Cobalt Studios

@Cobalt Studios

Has been in the works for a few months. Just great timing I suppose

@Raul-Sorin Sorban

@boostypunk What do you mean by moderator exactly?

Could you click refresh to make sure you're still logged in?

@Cobalt Studios

@XAVIER

This is completely different. A private commission vs. soliciting sales of a file that's on the platform off the platform to skirt fees, which is likely the true reason they're asking you to do it in the first place.

Creators directing you to make purchases offsite is actually against our TOS, so please feel free to report them for doing so. Them receiving their money a couple of days earlier is no excuse to risk making such payments.

Sorry, but we do not see the purchase on your account. There's nothing for us to refund here.

You feel that a review saying, "this plugin is shit” should be removed and investigated, but don’t expect the same scrutiny for reviews that say, "this plugin is awesome.” Both types of reviews, if lacking substance, are equally unhelpful. If a review doesn't explain why a plugin is great or bad, neither offers value to someone considering a purchase. Reviews need substance, whether positive or negative, to genuinely help potential customers. You argue against removing reviews for lacking context or substance, but at the same time, you say you're reading reviews to see if people are genuinely happy with their purchase. How would you know if someone is truly satisfied if the review just says something vague like "nice plugin" without any explanation? If reviews lack detail, like simply saying "this plugin is awesome" or "nice plugin," they don't actually tell you whether the purchase was a good experience or if the plugin met their expectations. Without context, reviews become meaningless, whether they're positive or negative. This is why moderation for substance, not just sentiment, is important for ensuring reviews provide value. Genuine doesn’t just mean expressing a feeling, it means providing an honest, informed opinion based on actual experience. A review that truly comes from the heart would have substance, offering details about what made the product great (or not) for the reviewer.

A review isn't sincere just because you wrote it. In fact, the opposite is true, a genuine review should reflect actual experience rather than generic praise without highlighting any real benefits the file offers.

It's hidden under file actions. I'll make a dedicated report button soon.

Exactly, because saying "your players enjoy it" is no different from saying "nice plugin." But why is it nice? Why do they enjoy it? It's a small request to ask for justification of your rating. Also, we've never pressured anyone to write their review in a specific way. We only provide examples to show how you can structure your review to add meaningful context. If you were to copy that wording, we’d reject it because it demonstrates a lack of effort. We genuinely believe that if you're not willing to put effort into your review, it's better not to leave one at all. Leaving a review without context does a disservice to everyone.

Are you referring to Npc Random Raids? If so, please submit a support request https://codefling.com/plugins/npc-random-raids?tab=support

This is contradictory. Either reviews can be curated, or they can't. You're introducing a moral standard to decide which reviews should be removed and which shouldn't. Essentially, we're doing the same thing, just with different criteria. The key term here is actual, which is the focus of our moderation. Our goal is to provide the genuine experience of the reviewer. We reject reviews that are fabricated, misleading, or related to support issues that the reviewer hasn't tried to resolve. Many reviews are driven by emotion and seldom represent the true experience. Our curation process ensures that reviews offer context, are free from emotional bias. We are not the party offering the service or product itself, but a marketplace for third-party content. Therefore, we can freely moderate reviews on files within our platform. Additionally, users agree to our moderation terms when submitting reviews. We ensure our practices comply with the Consumer Review Fairness Act, as we do not prevent users from sharing honest feedback, but we may moderate to ensure reviews follow our guidelines. This may be a bit biased on your part, given the lack of reviews you've received as a creator. But I can assure you that when you wake up one morning to a 1-star rating because a user feels that you should have implemented a feature that was never promised or planned, you will think differently. This comes across as somewhat misleading. You're assuming that most of the reviews we remove are negative, but in reality, over 98% of the reviews we moderate are 4 or 5 stars. While you're focusing on negative reviews tied to unreported support issues, the majority of reviews we reject are due to a lack of context or substance. We ensure that when customers read reviews, they see ones that genuinely reflect their experience. I often hear this argument about wanting to see all reviews, but the reality is that most people don’t actually do that. You’re likely to skim past them, only focusing on the reviews that address your specific concerns. Having numerous "nice" or "works good" reviews becomes repetitive and can actually diminish the overall value of reviews.