SELLERS can no longer leave NEGATIVE FEEDBACK on eBay

[ChrisPlatt]

Good. Fear of retaliation keeps good buyers from telling the truth about bad sellers.

Chris

 

[myoptic3]

I don't like the new change, and I didn't like the old way either. In the past I have refrained from leaving negative feedback for a seller (jerk took my money and never sent the camera) because I knew they would just retaliate and leave negative feedback for me. Fortunately, paypal, whom I am also not real fond of, ruled in my favor and I managed to get my money back, but that could have gone either way. Ebay's buying and selling rules have not made sense for a long time. It has forced me to buy from KEH more, which is fine as I like them, but they do not always have what I want. Over the years I have a nice list of ebay Favorite Sellers that I trust, so that helps. I now fund all of my purchases w/ a credit card when I use paypal in the hope that will give me some added protection, but I am not anxious to try this idea out. As a seller, I am a lot more hesitant to sell w/ these new rules and it isn't fair. Still, that is where the big numbers of buyers are, so I will continue to sell there. Maybe between this forum, photonet, a few others and KEH I can get weaned off ebay. They are about to lose what they had, and become something I do not much like.

 

[gdi]

As a seller, I am a lot more hesitant to sell w/ these new rules and it isn't fair.

I don't understand why it isn't fair.

If sellers had followed the spirit of the feedback system (i.e., played fair) I am sure this change would never have happened. Sellers who had been paid promptly should have left honest feedback after payment if they wanted to recieve feedback.

Instead a large group of sellers used the threat of bad feedback to extort good feedback from buyers. This devalued the feedback system to the point of being a true joke.

How fair is it to pay for an item up front, wait around to receive it, find out it was not as described, take the huge risk of returning it prior to a refund and hoping you get the money back - then getting bad feedback to top it off when you try to use the system as it was designed. The deck was stacked in favor of unscrupulous sellers, but now maybe this new scheme will add some fairness to the equation.

 

[mongo141]

AMEN, AMEN!!!!!!

Good. Fear of retaliation keeps good buyers from telling the truth about bad sellers.

Chris

 

[foto_fool]

Sellers who had been paid promptly should have left honest feedback after payment ...

I have to wonder if folks who want the seller to post feedback immediately after payment has been sent have ever sold anything on eBay .

The transaction is not complete until the buyer accepts the goods. This is how escrow works, which is a formalization of the transaction process that minimizes risk to buyer and seller.

Am I the only seller who has had more than one buyer claim the goods were DOA, return them for a refund, but send back somthing other than what I sent them? One time the serial numbers were different. Another time it wasn't even the same model!

The whole positive/neutral/negative feedback thing is simplistic, almost childish. In this age of data-rich web coding eBay should do away with the current scheme and allow sellers to give detailed buyer ratings just as the buyers now do the sellers: "pays promptly", "communicates well", "understands and abides by terms and conditions of sale", and "doesn't whine" would work for me .

 

[nico]

I have to wonder if folks who want the seller to post feedback immediately after payment has been sent have ever sold anything on eBay .

No, but as a buyer it's not my business, it's a problem of the seller. I honestly pay the right amount of money in the right time so, no way, I have to have the positive feedback.

The transaction is not complete until the buyer accepts the goods.[/B] This is how escrow works, which is a formalization of the transaction process that minimizes risk to buyer and seller.

So at the end I can have paid my money and got a brick for a camera. Do we have to have the same feedback? I don't think this process minimizes risk to buyer and seller, it only minimizes them for the bad sellers.

Good. Fear of retaliation keeps good buyers from telling the truth about bad sellers. Chris

Amen! Yes, it happened me twice. Hope that guys bought medicines with my money!

 

[Lukino]

I'm not a seller, and this new feedback system damages me! I was carefully cheking sellers and their prevoius buyer feedback BEFORE placing any bid, so it was easy to spot retaliators, junk-seller and a55hole-buyers. The way feedback worked was not perfect, but I got used to it, and many good sellers will not sell to me now. Why? Because I leave in Italy, where the world-worst mail service prospher! Many sellers alredy refuse to sell items to Italian bidders, because here is full of idiots that buy goods from USA of Hong Kong, then after two weeks of not recieving them post negative feedback. My last deal, to give an idea, was a Zorki from Russia: 31 days of waiting. It was send from Russia December 20, arrived in Italy december 21, and in my house January 20!!

Right, the previous feedback system wasn't fair for buyers, but actual isn't for anyone... Why not to just implement a double blind feedback? It would force communication between parts, kill retaliation, and be totally fair.

 

[gdi]

I have to wonder if folks who want the seller to post feedback immediately after payment has been sent have ever sold anything on eBay .

The transaction is not complete until the buyer accepts the goods. This is how escrow works, which is a formalization of the transaction process that minimizes risk to buyer and seller.

Am I the only seller who has had more than one buyer claim the goods were DOA, return them for a refund, but send back somthing other than what I sent them? One time the serial numbers were different. Another time it wasn't even the same model!

The whole positive/neutral/negative feedback thing is simplistic, almost childish. In this age of data-rich web coding eBay should do away with the current scheme and allow sellers to give detailed buyer ratings just as the buyers now do the sellers: "pays promptly", "communicates well", "understands and abides by terms and conditions of sale", and "doesn't whine" would work for me .

I have sold about as much as I have bought on eBay. And I know what escrow is - and it has nothing to do with the way the vast majority of eBay transactions are carried out.

Also, I have never had a buyer act the way you describe. I know it happens, but I also know it is much more rare than unreliable sellers. And in the cases you mention - how were you damaged? Did you refund before you received the substitution item back from the buyer? Did you go ahead and refund after you knew the item was not what you sold? Of course not - you held the buyers money till you received satisfaction, right?

You confuse the fully completed transaction with the intent of feedback. When the buyer pays, they have fulfilled thier commitment and also invested trust in the seller. A lot of sellers choose not to trust - in not only the buyer, but in thier own ability to work out an honest problem. Hence, they hold positive feedback for fulfilling the purchase obligation hostage.

Should a seller have to provide feedback immediately after a payment ? (I never said that. BTW) I don't think so, but the only reason for withholding it till the buyer provides it first is to keep the option to retaliate open.

 

[sepiareverb]

A much better fix is feedback that cannot be seen by either until both parties have posted. Buyers can be as rude as they wish when their incredible $25 deal on that rare Alpa body turns out to be full of rust and sellers can be as rude as they like when a buyer never lets us know the package arrived and all is ok.

I assume the deal is done from the buyers end when I get feedback, as I rarely, in fact almost never hear from buyers with even a "pkg arrived". They leave feedback, then I learn that they are satisfied. I don't want to be the stalking seller, writing every few days to be sure they are happy. So, when I get this confirmation that the deal is done I leave feedback. As a buyer I believe it a common courtesy to let the seller know the pkg arrived safely and the item is as expected, and that I'll be leaving them feedback right off.

I don't know how many times it needs to be said The deal is not done when payment is made. Perhaps it is so for those unscrupulous sellers, but this is absolutely not how I approach it, and not how most sellers approach it in my experience.

Positive feedback (or simply no feedback) for someone who pays promptly, but then says the item is sh1t, demands an instant refund but waits three weeks to get around to sending it back wrapped in newspaper without insurance in a beat-up box is not a good answer. I can't see how anyone could expect any seller to lie and say this buyer is ok for anyone else to deal with.

I do like the veiled means of feedback- posting a positive but saying "PITA AVOID LIKE THE PLAGUE", but these comments can get quickly buried, and sellers can no longer state 'No bids from buyers with less than 95% feedback', or 'Bidders with less than 95% feedback please contact before bidding' as one sees from time to time. Thes kinds of statements are in place not because sellers are scamming people but because buyers are.

All our b1tching won't do anything if it is only done here. Write to ebay- http://contact.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAP...gestions+to+eBay&instruction=&expirationDate=

 

[M. Valdemar]

Most of the people who approve of the changes are the type of whining, petty buyers who will now be free to leave a negative for the smallest and most minor problems. Dictatorship of the cheapskates and self-righteous.

I don't think anyone who has experience as a seller of high-value, high volume items thinks this is fair. I have excellent feedback since 1998, never deceive or cheat buyers, yet inevitably, and more so now then in the past, you get pain-in-the-neck buyers with absurd demands.

I have even seen websites where instructions are given to cheat sellers and get free items, using PayPal and eBay loopholes. It seems a lot of people are reading these now.

This will hurt the casual and hobby seller far worse than anyone else.

eBay may be in for trouble. They are clearly not a "venue" now, they have corralled sellers into their profit scheme.

 

[nicoy3k]

Thats ridiculous.

I've been scammed by a buyer on eBay, and because eBay always seems to side with the buyer, even when the buyer is not a verified paypal user and the seller is, I can no longer use ebay.

I sold an item via pick-up. The man came, checked out the item, payed me through paypal, and took the item. He then told eBay that I never shipped the item, because I didn't have a tracking number and I didn't have the buyer sign a form, I was forced to pay 500 dollars and my account was cancelled.

eBay is a joke, from its horrible and over-cluttered interface to their lack of customer service. Craigslist >>>> eBay.

 

[foto_fool]

Did you refund before you received the substitution item back from the buyer? Did you go ahead and refund after you knew the item was not what you sold? Of course not - you held the buyers money till you received satisfaction, right?

You confuse the fully completed transaction with the intent of feedback. When the buyer pays, they have fulfilled thier commitment and also invested trust in the seller. A lot of sellers choose not to trust - in not only the buyer, but in thier own ability to work out an honest problem. Hence, they hold positive feedback for fulfilling the purchase obligation hostage.

Should a seller have to provide feedback immediately after a payment ? (I never said that. BTW) I don't think so, but the only reason for withholding it till the buyer provides it first is to keep the option to retaliate open.

Clearly men of goodwill can disagree. Of course feedback is withheld to keep the option of retaliation open. That's the point - there needs to be some way to keep scamming buyers accountable.

And yes I was damaged in both cases. My own stupid fault. After the sale the money was in my PayPal account, but by the time I received the false returns it was not. They paid with credit card and disputed the transactions. PayPal and eBay were useless in helping me to resolve, though both "buyers" were eventually thrown off. Now when I receive money into PayPal I transfer it out immediately.

You may disagree but I stand by my assertion that the buyer's responsibilitiy in a transaction is not complete until the buyer accepts the goods and confirms that they don't want their money back.

 

[gdi]

Most of the people who approve of the changes are the type of whining, petty buyers who will now be free to leave a negative for the smallest and most minor problems. Dictatorship of the cheapskates and self-righteous.

A Dictatorship forcibly passed down from the unscrupulous seller, right?

I don't think anyone who has experience as a seller of high-value, high volume items thinks this is fair. I have excellent feedback since 1998, never deceive or cheat buyers, yet inevitably, and more so now then in the past, you get pain-in-the-neck buyers with absurd demands.

I'm confused - is your good feedback a result of providing a pleasant experience or because you withhold feedback till you get good feedback from those despised customers?

eBay may be in for trouble. They are clearly not a "venue" now, they have corralled sellers into their profit scheme.

I doubt this will be a problem for eBay. If the buyers are there the sellers will stay, there is no question about it.

Anyway, I'm not here to argue, but the value of the feedback system has been nil due to feedback retaliation. This change can't make it any harder to judge the reliabilty of a member.

 

[gdi]

Clearly men of goodwill can disagree. Of course feedback is withheld to keep the option of retaliation open. That's the point - there needs to be some way to keep scamming buyers accountable.

Come on, you know that isn't the point of feedback!

And yes I was damaged in both cases. My own stupid fault. After the sale the money was in my PayPal account, but by the time I received the false returns it was not. They paid with credit card and disputed the transactions. PayPal and eBay were useless in helping me to resolve, though both "buyers" were eventually thrown off. Now when I receive money into PayPal I transfer it out immediately.

There you go, the existing feedback system wasn't working for you. Weren't you warned away by all the Negative retalitory feedback these sellers received prior to your transaction? :angel:

You may disagree but I stand by my assertion that the buyer's responsibilitiy in a transaction is not complete until the buyer accepts the goods and confirms that they don't want their money back.

I don't really disagree with the fact that the seller should wait till the product is delivered prior to giving feedback. But that is a lot different from withholding your feedback to retaliate - which you say is the intent of seller feedback.

 

[sepiareverb]

Blind feedback. Keeps it honest, prevents retaliation. Email ebay.

http://contact.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAP...gestions+to+eBay&instruction=&expirationDate=

 

[M. Valdemar]

No, I don't despise them and I buy AND sell on eBay. I always immediately leave good feedback when I receive a satisfactory item.

But it's a fact of life that the more you sell, the more buyers you will encounter who want something for nothing. Some of them are quite skillful and deliberate in what they do. They know EXACTLY how to work the system to steal items.

Try losing a few $1000 cameras to a conniving jerk, then come back and tell me that sellers should be completely defenseless.


I'm confused - is your good feedback a result of providing a pleasant experience or because you withhold feedback till you get good feedback from those despised customers?

 

[danwilly]

I support the new policy. I made a purchase that I never received and finally left a negative feedback. The asshole left me a negative feedback and then sent me pleading e-mails to mutually withdraw. I said no dice. Then I noticed he had about 70 mutually withdrawn feedbacks. What a scam. We deserve better information on the sellers. That will avoid more problems. Eventually I got a refund.

 

[gdi]

No, I don't despise them and I buy AND sell on eBay. I always immediately leave good feedback when I receive a satisfactory item.

But it's a fact of life that the more you sell, the more buyers you will encounter who want something for nothing. Some of them are quite skillful and deliberate in what they do. They know EXACTLY how to work the system to steal items.

Try losing a few $1000 cameras to a conniving jerk, then come back and tell me that sellers should be completely defenseless.


I'm confused - is your good feedback a result of providing a pleasant experience or because you withhold feedback till you get good feedback from those despised customers?

I have sold a few multi thousand dollar items on eBay - I haven't lost any yet.

No doubt, I would be very upset if it happened, but I don't think that negative feedback will resolve it. Are you saying that a single buyer id can rip off many sellers without getting banned and therfore nullifying the need for neg feedback?

The only way I see sellers getting ripped off is with a stolen card, chargeback, or forged Money Orders, etc - there are ways to protect yourself from that. Honest buyers are always at a disadvantage compared to sellers - they pay up front. Sellers will never be defenseless.

 

[M. Valdemar]

Don't rely on eBay to weed out, suspend or kick off bad buyers.

Their "trust and safety" record is atrocious, it's not going to become magically better.

I have sold a few multi thousand dollar items on eBay - I haven't lost any yet.

No doubt, I would be very upset if it happened, but I don't think that negative feedback will resolve it. Are you saying that a single buyer id can rip off many sellers without getting banned and therfore nullifying the need for neg feedback?

The only way I see sellers getting ripped off is with a stolen card, chargeback, or forged Money Orders, etc - there are ways to protect yourself from that. Honest buyers are always at a disadvantage compared to sellers - they pay up front. Sellers will never be defenseless.

 

[sepiareverb]

Don't rely on eBay to weed out, suspend or kick off bad buyers.

Their "trust and safety" record is atrocious, it's not going to become magically better.

I agree wholeheartedly here. Can you imagine the multi-page web-form of *Required fields we'd need to fill out to 'report' a buyer?