feedback extortion

cyberbob

Brooker_Dave wrote: »

Ebay took something that by and large worked, and wrecked it.

HTH.

How can you say a system worked when a lot of buyers were scared to leave honest feedback due to retaliation. It may have worked for you but it didn't for the majority.

Brooker_Dave

cyberbob wrote: »

How can you say a system worked when a lot of buyers were scared to leave honest feedback due to retaliation. It may have worked for you but it didn't for the majority.

A system where sellers cannot warn each other about fraudulant and difficult buyers is better???

sovay

"A system where sellers cannot warn each other about fraudulant and difficult buyers is better???"

But you are apparently happy that this buyer cannot warn other buyers about fraudulent and difficult sellers?

This case was not a refund on a whim - the buyer paid, and received damaged goods in return.
Wanting their money back does NOT make them fraudulent.
We have no reason to suppose that the buyer intercepted the courier and ASKED them to damage the goods.
Nor that they are in the habit of behaving in this way, that you presumably consider unreasonable - of wanting their money back if the seller is unable to supply the goods in reasonable condition.

Whereas Warehouse tells us clearly that the seller is in the habit of behaving in this way - extorting untrue statements under threat of not receiving any refund at all.

If the seller had not previously behaved in the way that Warehouse tells us they did, then their feedback would have reflected their habits, and this buyer (and possibly others - who knows?) would never have bought from them.

custardy

Brooker_Dave wrote: »

Yes.

Ebay feedback used to be an honest no nonsense way to decide if sellers or buyers were worth the risk of trading with.

Now it's all about staying above a certian percentage to keep your account, having to get a positive just to get paid etc.

Ebay took something that by and large worked, and wrecked it.

HTH.

not really
buyer doesnt get item/broken item or whatever and leaves a neg
gets neg in return
wheres that fair on the buyer?

soolin

sovay wrote: »

Are you suggesting that I have been brainwashed, Dave, or that I am a representative of eBay, attempting to brainwash you?
t."

You may have spotted that few regular members actually bother repsonding to certain posts anymore as there is very little point. When a user has issues with trading on ebay and get themselves banned on more than one occasion they sometimes tend to blame ebay or paypal, when in fact it is there lack of understanding that has caused the problem. Anyone who disagrees with their blanket 'ebay and paypal are terrible' mantra is first accused of being brainwashed and then usually accused of working for them.

Personally I am happy that I understand how to use ebay and paypal, and you are obviously the same and I wouldn't therefore worry that someone who does struggle with the concept believes you to be brainwashed.

Brooker_Dave

sovay wrote: »

"A system where sellers cannot warn each other about fraudulant and difficult buyers is better???"

But you are apparently happy that this buyer cannot warn other buyers about fraudulent and difficult sellers?

Where's the fraud in offering a refund???

sovay wrote: »

This case was not a refund on a whim - the buyer paid, and received damaged goods in return.
Wanting their money back does NOT make them fraudulent.

I didn't say it did.

Brooker_Dave

custardy wrote: »

not really
buyer doesnt get item/broken item or whatever and leaves a neg
gets neg in return
wheres that fair on the buyer?

Such is life, but in the majority of cases sellers took the neg on the chin and didn't retaliate.

Brooker_Dave

soolin wrote: »

You may have spotted that few regular members actually bother repsonding to certain posts anymore as there is very little point. When a user has issues with trading on ebay and get themselves banned on more than one occasion they sometimes tend to blame ebay or paypal, when in fact it is there lack of understanding that has caused the problem. Anyone who disagrees with their blanket 'ebay and paypal are terrible' mantra is first accused of being brainwashed and then usually accused of working for them

Do you think all the changes that have been made to ebay are for the best and have it's users interests at heart?

Or would you rather this board was just a cheerleading platform for ebay PR company employees?

custardy

Brooker_Dave wrote: »

Such is life, but in the majority of cases sellers took the neg on the chin and didn't retaliate.

really? for every neg i left i got a neg in return
infact i once got a neg stating non payer
after paying,getting the item and then contacting them as it didnt work

Brooker_Dave

custardy wrote: »

really? for every neg i left i got a neg in return
infact i once got a neg stating non payer
after paying,getting the item and then contacting them as it didnt work

I didn't say it was a perfect system, but it was better than the blanket ban on seller feedback.

Why sould sellers (who after all provide ebay with the majority of its income) not be able to rate transactions?