LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksI only keep mine open for paying through dealextreme.com and taking payments for stuff on here, don't even like money going to me through it really thoughOriginally Posted by Koolpc
I only keep mine open for paying through dealextreme.com and taking payments for stuff on here, don't even like money going to me through it really though
I am not going to quote the whole post again, but I wholly agree with Saracen's view on feedback. I've bought and sold on Ebay, and I also expect sellers to leave the feedback first, and buyers as soon as items have been received and inspected. I reckon that Ebay introduced the drastic and heavily one-sided 'no-negative feedback to buyers' because too many sellers made it a habit of withholding feedback.
I am not in favour of the new rule as I believe that sellers should be allowed to leave negatives to time wasters. However, the old ways also created a one sided-environment trust wise. There is no exchange at all. The buyer has effectively no gesture of good will from the seller and has to trust that the seller will send the item as described and/or resolve any issue that arises fairly. Trig's case illustrates that Ebay do not always side with the buyer.
The one time I've not received something I bought on Ebay, was for a very low value item (mini-USB to USB cable). I wrote off the loss in part because I was given a spare by a friend, the item was very low in value compared to the little time I had, and most importantly, I could believe that the items was sent, but lost in the mail. Why? Simply because the seller gave me a positive feedback as soon as he received payment. I saw it as a gesture of good will, and decided that no reasonably sane seller to risk their perfect feedback over 2 quid (or maybe that was his plan all along). Had the person held back on leaving a feedback, I would seen his actions differently, and reacted differently. There are going to be bad sellers and bad buyers, but if we assume that most sellers and most buyers are legitimate, it does make most sense to me for the seller to leave feedback first.
Last edited by TooNice; 16-10-2008 at 10:58 PM.
Indeed, and it's one of the best rule changes they've ever made, because it stops feedback abuse by sellers.
As a buyer, about the only real way I have to assess most sellers is via feedback, and if the people that deal with them won't risk leaving bad feedback for fear of retaliation, then I can't rely on feedback on a seller, and without that, feedback is pointless.
Nothing is ever perfect, and either way, it's open to abuse. But Shooty said that sellers should NEVER be the frist to leave feedback. And I adamantly disagree. There's a deal, in which the seller supplies goods, and the buyer supplies money. Having supplied the money, I've fulfilled my bit. If the goods are as-described, and arrive, and are reasonably prompt, the seller will get positive feedback. My commitment was to pay, and if I've paid, why should the seller refuse to leave feedback until I do.
Until this change in feedback, I simply didn't leave feedback until a seller did, because I WON'T be blackmailed into it. The reason I took to doing that was that rarely, if ever, did a seller leave it first. And sometimes, even after I left positive feedback, they didn't bother. And a few sellers, when I queried it, said they wanted to see what my feedback was like first. The hell with that. I paid, and I expect feedback.
Now, of course, the boot is on the other foot. I buy, I pay and I wait. If no feedback arrives, guess what? After a decent period has gone past, I'll give negative.
In the past, I've always paid immediately, usually within minutes of an auction ending. And yet, several times, I've been treated in an off-hand manner by sellers. Well, I'm enjoying having the upper hand for a change, and with sellers not being able to hold my 100% positive feedback to ransom. If I pay promptly, and I do, I expect to receive feedback to reflect that. If the goods are as the seller promised, and they arrive within the due period, then I'll leave positive, and gladly. But, if they decide to wait to see what my feedback is, then at the very least, they'll get downgraded on the assessment, and they at the least risk getting negative, because I'm sick of being treated as a scammer, until I prove otherwise with my feedback.
I'd advise, Blitzen, that you avoid selling to me at all, because if you don't leave feedback, you'll very likely get some you won't like.
As for how eBay treat disputes, well, as an honest buyer, that isn't my problem. Moan at eBay or don't use it. That, it seems, is how a lot of people are starting to react anyway, as I know an increasing number of both buyers and sellers that are increasingly refusing to. Including, with a few rare exceptions, me - the exceptions being people I KNOW are reputable. Anyone else, these days, I rarely take the chance because it isn't worth the risk of hassle. I'd rather pay more and use a reputable shop.
They should have dual feedback then, neg feedback from buying affects who will buy from you when you sell. The feedback you receive as a buyer has little importance on your selling status I'd say. Although I don't mean cut it out completely as potential buyers should still be able to check but when its seperated it'd be less harmful and I don't think it would be deceiving to any buyers.
Seems like a good idea, moogle.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote