When a user has its buying privileges revoked, it should automatically revoke
its feedback privileges. This in order to prevent retaliatory actions from buyer
and seller.
Please keep this place tidy
When a user has its buying privileges revoked, it should automatically revoke
its feedback privileges. This in order to prevent retaliatory actions from buyer
and seller.
Please keep this place tidy
Theoretically it seems a good idea but the buying privileges revoked concern
the possibility to place new orders and the retaliatory feedback concerns past
orders when the buyer had his privileges, then I am not agree.
Revoking privileges is an attempt to prevent repeating previous actions.
Seen as such, you still disagree?
What previous actions, though? If the previous order was NPB or NSS (which could
lead to revoking privileges) then here is already a mechanism in place to have
the feedback removed.
If it was just that the two parties were not happy with the transaction, that's
a different story.
When a user has its buying privileges revoked, it should automatically revoke
its feedback privileges. This in order to prevent retaliatory actions from buyer
and seller.
Please keep this place tidy
Theoretically it seems a good idea but the buying privileges revoked concern
the possibility to place new orders and the retaliatory feedback concerns past
orders when the buyer had his privileges, then I am not agree.
Davide
I agree with you, and disagree with the proposed rule.
If the sale went through, feedback should be allowed.
Those who bother to read feedback usually can spot when the feedback is unjustified.
I am against some of the current removal of feedback that occurs.
I think feedback should be much harder to get removed than it now is.
Theoretically it seems a good idea but the buying privileges revoked concern
the possibility to place new orders and the retaliatory feedback concerns past
orders when the buyer had his privileges, then I am not agree.
Davide
I agree with you, and disagree with the proposed rule.
If the sale went through, feedback should be allowed.
Those who bother to read feedback usually can spot when the feedback is unjustified.
I am against some of the current removal of feedback that occurs.
I think feedback should be much harder to get removed than it now is.
To give feedback is easy, removal of feedback is easy.
Instead of focusing on a harder removal policy I think it is better to prevent
incorrect or unrelated feedback by removing the possibilty to do post them in
the first place. Prevention before correction. It also forces anyone to think
twice about the feedback the are about to give.
Anyone with revoked privileges did something that made them revoked. No need
to let the revokee do more damage to the community.
When a user has its buying privileges revoked, it should automatically revoke
its feedback privileges. This in order to prevent retaliatory actions from buyer
and seller.
Please keep this place tidy
So let's assume that a user is blocked for being under age. An unscrupulous seller
decides to take advantage of this and not ship the paid order from this now-banned
buyer. Why do you feel that it is fair to community for the buyer not to be able
post appropriate feedback?
I certainly wouldn't want to deal with such a seller and would appreciate the
feedback.
When a user has its buying privileges revoked, it should automatically revoke
its feedback privileges. This in order to prevent retaliatory actions from buyer
and seller.
Please keep this place tidy
So let's assume that a user is blocked for being under age. An unscrupulous seller
decides to take advantage of this and not ship the paid order from this now-banned
buyer. Why do you feel that it is fair to community for the buyer not to be able
post appropriate feedback?
I certainly wouldn't want to deal with such a seller and would appreciate the
feedback.
What stops the buyer from claiming that even if they received the order? An unscupulous
seller would reply that they sent the package and buyer is mad about the revokation.
So let's assume that a user is blocked for being under age. An unscrupulous seller
decides to take advantage of this and not ship the paid order from this now-banned
buyer. Why do you feel that it is fair to community for the buyer not to be able
post appropriate feedback?
I certainly wouldn't want to deal with such a seller and would appreciate the
feedback.
Revoked privileges = there's something not completely right; therefor it acts
as a warning to sellers and buyers.
During this warning-period it is up to the revoked one to 'prove' the opposite.
And it is safe for the community to have it's overall posting rights revoked
as well.
Shipping to an already revoked buyer sounds like an intended act of fraud?
In Dutch you are 'te kwader trouw', meaning you are aware of the wrongfulness
of the act but you still act like it.
So let's assume that a user is blocked for being under age. An unscrupulous seller
decides to take advantage of this and not ship the paid order from this now-banned
buyer. Why do you feel that it is fair to community for the buyer not to be able
post appropriate feedback?
I certainly wouldn't want to deal with such a seller and would appreciate the
feedback.
Revoked privileges = there's something not completely right; therefor it acts
as a warning to sellers and buyers.
During this warning-period it is up to the revoked one to 'prove' the opposite.
And it is safe for the community to have it's overall posting rights revoked
as well.
I don't see that that follows. Should someone with buying privileges revoked
also be banned from the forum? From chat? Should they be banned from selling?
Should we block their access to the catalog?
Being blocked from buying should block the user from buying. I don't think it
should block them from anything else.
Shipping to an already revoked buyer sounds like an intended act of fraud?
In Dutch you are 'te kwader trouw', meaning you are aware of the wrongfulness
of the act but you still act like it.
Not shipping to someone who has paid would be worse, no?
When a user has its buying privileges revoked, it should automatically revoke
its feedback privileges. This in order to prevent retaliatory actions from buyer
and seller.
Please keep this place tidy
So let's assume that a user is blocked for being under age. An unscrupulous seller
decides to take advantage of this and not ship the paid order from this now-banned
buyer. Why do you feel that it is fair to community for the buyer not to be able
post appropriate feedback?
I certainly wouldn't want to deal with such a seller and would appreciate the
feedback.
I think that's a slightly different situation. If a buyer is found to be underaged
they don't just have their buying privileges revoked, they get their account
cancelled (as far as I know) and they actually do not have the ability to leave
feedback. So, for the situation you describe, this suggestion has actually already
been implemented.
When a user has its buying privileges revoked, it should automatically revoke
its feedback privileges. This in order to prevent retaliatory actions from buyer
and seller.
Please keep this place tidy
I am not sure this is the correct remedy, but there is a situation where it would
apply. A member with revoked buying privileges creates a new account and places
several orders. At some point the new account is merged with the revoked account.
Sellers then have a problem. They have a valid open order in whatever status
for a member with revoked privileges. If they simply cancel the order they
face the potential for negative feedback.
When a user has its buying privileges revoked, it should automatically revoke
its feedback privileges. This in order to prevent retaliatory actions from buyer
and seller.
Please keep this place tidy
I am not sure this is the correct remedy, but there is a situation where it would
apply. A member with revoked buying privileges creates a new account and places
several orders. At some point the new account is merged with the revoked account.
Sellers then have a problem. They have a valid open order in whatever status
for a member with revoked privileges. If they simply cancel the order they
face the potential for negative feedback.
In that case I would agree that any feedback should be removed (or blocked),
because it would be for a bogus order -- an order placed after the buyer had
their buying privileges revoked.
In that case I would agree that any feedback should be removed (or blocked),
because it would be for a bogus order -- an order placed after the buyer had
their buying privileges revoked.
Can that be done? Buying after your rights have been revoked?
Maybe the solution is worse than the action, I'm not sure.
Anyway, there must be some sort of 'holding area' where disputes are handled
and in the meantime the disputers that are 'banned' must be kept away from doing
more harm. That's my intention anyway. Banning it from all the options of BL
sounds harse indeed.... Mmm, tricky.
In that case I would agree that any feedback should be removed (or blocked),
because it would be for a bogus order -- an order placed after the buyer had
their buying privileges revoked.
We already handle this for members who have had their membership revoked and/or
are on your stoplist. I think a simple tweaking of this rule to include lost
of specific privileges would cover this example.
Really, anything that comes from making a bogus second account should be disallowed.
When a user has its buying privileges revoked, it should automatically revoke
its feedback privileges. This in order to prevent retaliatory actions from buyer
and seller.
Please keep this place tidy
I feel that feedback is about the transaction. If a transaction took place then
both participants should be able to leave appropriate (and honest) feedback.
That is what serves the community best.
Yes but I believe this thread was started because of NON-HONEST RETALIATORY feedback...that
is totally different from what you are referring to and I think the OP was trying
to address the above case...
LM
In Suggestions, calebfishn writes:
In Suggestions, StarBrick writes:
When a user has its buying privileges revoked, it should automatically revoke
its feedback privileges. This in order to prevent retaliatory actions from buyer
and seller.
Please keep this place tidy
I feel that feedback is about the transaction. If a transaction took place then
both participants should be able to leave appropriate (and honest) feedback.
That is what serves the community best.
Yes but I believe this thread was started because of NON-HONEST RETALIATORY feedback...
Sort of. The buyer wasn't happy with the transaction because they got a Neutral
out of it. While I don't agree with them that the best response is to leave a
Neutral of their own, I wouldn't say that doing so is dishonest. They weren't
happy with the overall transaction (which, for them apparently, includes feedback
received).
Netherlands, Gelderland
Italy, Lazio
Canada, Ontario
USA, Oregon
