Discussion Forum: Suggestions(Post New Message)
Redisplay Messages: Compact | Brief | All | Full      Show Messages: All | Without Replies

 Author: Rick_S. View Messages Posted By Rick_S.
 Posted: Jun 23, 2020 19:28
 Subject: Re: Changing rules of feedback
 Viewed: 32 times
 Topic: Suggestions
View Message
View
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
In Suggestions, Heartbricker writes:
  I see, I think that there's blame on both sides here.
This should have been resolved better by the seller as the customer was obviously
not satisfied and was justified to leave a non positive.
The seller fell short and obviously didn't provide a satisfactory solution
to the buyer- and escalated the matter by leaving non positive.
The buyer abused the NSS system as a result of the seller's behavior.
This could be looked at in a couple ways- the feedback system wasn't abused
here- the NSS system was abused.
Our store puts more emphasis on customer experience so we would have sent the
piece or would have made a plea for the buyer to see what would be a reasonable
solution.
We also notify our buyers before shipping an order that is short to give them
an option to cancel.
I do think it is reasonable to spend $4 to repair a 7 cent mistake- but i believe
in taking full responsibility for my mistakes.
Two adults should be able to resolve their disputes- no need for a nanny.
the NSS was an abuse of BL TOS and requires interjection by admin- the feedback
system doesn't.

and yet the buyer is stuck with a negative he does not deserve and you do not
think that needs to be fixed?
 Author: Heartbricker View Messages Posted By Heartbricker
 Posted: Jun 23, 2020 19:17
 Subject: Re: Changing rules of feedback
 Viewed: 32 times
 Topic: Suggestions
View Message
View
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
  In Suggestions, Heartbricker writes:
  In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
  In Suggestions, Heartbricker writes:
  In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
  As it goes a rule not allowing retaliatory feedback should also be added for
removal of said feedback since as the rules stand retaliatory feedback is allowed:

Feedback you Received:
The following are currently the only valid reasons for which you can request
feedback you received to be removed:
Feedback you received contains vulgar language.
Feedback you received contains personally identifying information including your
name, address, e-mail address or telephone number.
You are the seller and the buyer has not paid. Non-Paying Buyer Alert has been
completed or the buyer has accepted the NPB penalty via NPX.
You are the buyer and the seller has not responded or shipped. Non-Responding
Seller Alert or Non-Shipping Seller Alert has been completed.
Feedback you received was posted by a duplicate account of a user who had their
membership terminated.
Feedback you received was posted by a duplicate account of a user who was on
your Stop List before the order was placed.
If you're requesting feedback to be removed for the last 2 reasons above,
you should contact the Help Desk before you submit the request and let us know
the original username of the duplicate account.
Requests can be submitted until the order is purged from the system - up to 6
months from the order date. Requests are submitted to the BrickLink Administration
for approval. If the feedback is removed, it cannot be reposted. Each request
has a status:

I understand the frustration of getting a retaliatory feedback BUT i don't
support interjecting the BL admins into disputes over feedback.
The BL team has enough to do without this added task which is not a revenue producing
nor a productive use of their time.
Having the admin being a referee between two disputing users may result in one
of those users leaving the site which will not be beneficial for the greater
good.
Retaliatory feedback is easy to spot and usually hurts the image of the user
who left it more than the user who received it.

oh wouldn't be surprised if the seller made it onto a lot of peoples do not
buy from lists since his actions are not those of a good seller. but the whole
reason behind admins and moderators is to moderate between 2 parties, instead
the buyer was forced to file an NSS so as to remove said feedback, do you think
that is better?

Not sure which seller you are speaking of.
Buyers filing NSS to remove feedback is a violation against bricklinks' TOS
therefore does require interjection- retaliatory feedback isn't.
The case you described is very rare.

the incident is over a seller not shipping a full order, which the buyer left
negative feedback then the seller left retaliatory feedback and the only option
the buyer had was to file an NSS.

read this entire forum chain to get at why I posted this:

https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1205906

I see, I think that there's blame on both sides here.
This should have been resolved better by the seller as the customer was obviously
not satisfied and was justified to leave a non positive.
The seller fell short and obviously didn't provide a satisfactory solution
to the buyer- and escalated the matter by leaving non positive.
The buyer abused the NSS system as a result of the seller's behavior.
This could be looked at in a couple ways- the feedback system wasn't abused
here- the NSS system was abused.
Our store puts more emphasis on customer experience so we would have sent the
piece or would have made a plea for the buyer to see what would be a reasonable
solution.
We also notify our buyers before shipping an order that is short to give them
an option to cancel.
I do think it is reasonable to spend $4 to repair a 7 cent mistake- but i believe
in taking full responsibility for my mistakes.
Two adults should be able to resolve their disputes- no need for a nanny.
the NSS was an abuse of BL TOS and requires interjection by admin- the feedback
system doesn't.
 Author: Rick_S. View Messages Posted By Rick_S.
 Posted: Jun 23, 2020 18:39
 Subject: Re: Changing rules of feedback
 Viewed: 41 times
 Topic: Suggestions
View Message
View
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
In Suggestions, Heartbricker writes:
  In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
  In Suggestions, Heartbricker writes:
  In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
  As it goes a rule not allowing retaliatory feedback should also be added for
removal of said feedback since as the rules stand retaliatory feedback is allowed:

Feedback you Received:
The following are currently the only valid reasons for which you can request
feedback you received to be removed:
Feedback you received contains vulgar language.
Feedback you received contains personally identifying information including your
name, address, e-mail address or telephone number.
You are the seller and the buyer has not paid. Non-Paying Buyer Alert has been
completed or the buyer has accepted the NPB penalty via NPX.
You are the buyer and the seller has not responded or shipped. Non-Responding
Seller Alert or Non-Shipping Seller Alert has been completed.
Feedback you received was posted by a duplicate account of a user who had their
membership terminated.
Feedback you received was posted by a duplicate account of a user who was on
your Stop List before the order was placed.
If you're requesting feedback to be removed for the last 2 reasons above,
you should contact the Help Desk before you submit the request and let us know
the original username of the duplicate account.
Requests can be submitted until the order is purged from the system - up to 6
months from the order date. Requests are submitted to the BrickLink Administration
for approval. If the feedback is removed, it cannot be reposted. Each request
has a status:

I understand the frustration of getting a retaliatory feedback BUT i don't
support interjecting the BL admins into disputes over feedback.
The BL team has enough to do without this added task which is not a revenue producing
nor a productive use of their time.
Having the admin being a referee between two disputing users may result in one
of those users leaving the site which will not be beneficial for the greater
good.
Retaliatory feedback is easy to spot and usually hurts the image of the user
who left it more than the user who received it.

oh wouldn't be surprised if the seller made it onto a lot of peoples do not
buy from lists since his actions are not those of a good seller. but the whole
reason behind admins and moderators is to moderate between 2 parties, instead
the buyer was forced to file an NSS so as to remove said feedback, do you think
that is better?

Not sure which seller you are speaking of.
Buyers filing NSS to remove feedback is a violation against bricklinks' TOS
therefore does require interjection- retaliatory feedback isn't.
The case you described is very rare.

the incident is over a seller not shipping a full order, which the buyer left
negative feedback then the seller left retaliatory feedback and the only option
the buyer had was to file an NSS.

read this entire forum chain to get at why I posted this:

https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1205906
 Author: Heartbricker View Messages Posted By Heartbricker
 Posted: Jun 23, 2020 18:32
 Subject: Re: Changing rules of feedback
 Viewed: 48 times
 Topic: Suggestions
View Message
View
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
  In Suggestions, Heartbricker writes:
  In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
  As it goes a rule not allowing retaliatory feedback should also be added for
removal of said feedback since as the rules stand retaliatory feedback is allowed:

Feedback you Received:
The following are currently the only valid reasons for which you can request
feedback you received to be removed:
Feedback you received contains vulgar language.
Feedback you received contains personally identifying information including your
name, address, e-mail address or telephone number.
You are the seller and the buyer has not paid. Non-Paying Buyer Alert has been
completed or the buyer has accepted the NPB penalty via NPX.
You are the buyer and the seller has not responded or shipped. Non-Responding
Seller Alert or Non-Shipping Seller Alert has been completed.
Feedback you received was posted by a duplicate account of a user who had their
membership terminated.
Feedback you received was posted by a duplicate account of a user who was on
your Stop List before the order was placed.
If you're requesting feedback to be removed for the last 2 reasons above,
you should contact the Help Desk before you submit the request and let us know
the original username of the duplicate account.
Requests can be submitted until the order is purged from the system - up to 6
months from the order date. Requests are submitted to the BrickLink Administration
for approval. If the feedback is removed, it cannot be reposted. Each request
has a status:

I understand the frustration of getting a retaliatory feedback BUT i don't
support interjecting the BL admins into disputes over feedback.
The BL team has enough to do without this added task which is not a revenue producing
nor a productive use of their time.
Having the admin being a referee between two disputing users may result in one
of those users leaving the site which will not be beneficial for the greater
good.
Retaliatory feedback is easy to spot and usually hurts the image of the user
who left it more than the user who received it.

oh wouldn't be surprised if the seller made it onto a lot of peoples do not
buy from lists since his actions are not those of a good seller. but the whole
reason behind admins and moderators is to moderate between 2 parties, instead
the buyer was forced to file an NSS so as to remove said feedback, do you think
that is better?

Not sure which seller you are speaking of.
Buyers filing NSS to remove feedback is a violation against bricklinks' TOS
therefore does require interjection- retaliatory feedback isn't.
The case you described is very rare.
 Author: Rick_S. View Messages Posted By Rick_S.
 Posted: Jun 23, 2020 18:23
 Subject: Re: Changing rules of feedback
 Viewed: 46 times
 Topic: Suggestions
View Message
View
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
In Suggestions, Heartbricker writes:
  In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
  As it goes a rule not allowing retaliatory feedback should also be added for
removal of said feedback since as the rules stand retaliatory feedback is allowed:

Feedback you Received:
The following are currently the only valid reasons for which you can request
feedback you received to be removed:
Feedback you received contains vulgar language.
Feedback you received contains personally identifying information including your
name, address, e-mail address or telephone number.
You are the seller and the buyer has not paid. Non-Paying Buyer Alert has been
completed or the buyer has accepted the NPB penalty via NPX.
You are the buyer and the seller has not responded or shipped. Non-Responding
Seller Alert or Non-Shipping Seller Alert has been completed.
Feedback you received was posted by a duplicate account of a user who had their
membership terminated.
Feedback you received was posted by a duplicate account of a user who was on
your Stop List before the order was placed.
If you're requesting feedback to be removed for the last 2 reasons above,
you should contact the Help Desk before you submit the request and let us know
the original username of the duplicate account.
Requests can be submitted until the order is purged from the system - up to 6
months from the order date. Requests are submitted to the BrickLink Administration
for approval. If the feedback is removed, it cannot be reposted. Each request
has a status:

I understand the frustration of getting a retaliatory feedback BUT i don't
support interjecting the BL admins into disputes over feedback.
The BL team has enough to do without this added task which is not a revenue producing
nor a productive use of their time.
Having the admin being a referee between two disputing users may result in one
of those users leaving the site which will not be beneficial for the greater
good.
Retaliatory feedback is easy to spot and usually hurts the image of the user
who left it more than the user who received it.

oh wouldn't be surprised if the seller made it onto a lot of peoples do not
buy from lists since his actions are not those of a good seller. but the whole
reason behind admins and moderators is to moderate between 2 parties, instead
the buyer was forced to file an NSS so as to remove said feedback, do you think
that is better?

Next Page: 5 More | 10 More | 25 More | 50 More | 100 More