The topic of Neutral feedback and how they are seen as minor negatives comes
up
quite a lot and although I’m sure this idea may not go down well with some....
I think one interesting concept could be to make it so that after 3 months any
feedback
that has not been left automatically turns into a Neutral which would probably
mean about 30% of any sellers feedback will no doubt be made up of Neutrals which
might then make leaving a manual Neutral seem less Negative and more acceptable
for a buyer to submit and for a seller to receive?
A seller could say why should I have to accept receiving Neutrals just because
a buyer couldn’t be bothered to leave feedback but firstly you have to remember
that the same situation will occur for everyone so that shouldn’t matter too
much especially if Neutral is more commonly expected however my theory is that
those customers that are particularly happy with their order be that because
it shipped quickly, well packaged, great parts, no fees, reasonable shipping
cost etc, etc.. are much more likely to WANT to let the seller know its arrived
and they are very happy with everything.
If a customer is left pondering because they are disgruntled about a couple of
things they may then be more inclined to leave Neutral or let it turn to a Neutral
automatically rather than leaving the usual somewhat less than deserved Positive
rating!
My other theory is that you may actually get more people choosing to leave feedback
in the first place because they may not want the seller to receive an automated
Neutral from them but on the other hand this option allows those buyers that
don’t want to leave feedback for a seller who delivered a less than perfect transaction
the option to allow it to just turn to a Neutral.
If you think about it every transaction would be destined to become a Neutral
feedback and only those that specifically choose to give Positive or Negative
will change that eventuality which would probably make more sense?
Therefore two sellers with 100 feedback instead of looking almost identical may
end up looking very different based on their overall performance:-
Or at least that’s the theory if you go by the law of averages when it comes
to those that don’t leave any feedback and then add to that all those who had
previously been holding back with giving sellers a Neutral rating!
The topic of Neutral feedback and how they are seen as minor negatives comes
up
quite a lot and although I’m sure this idea may not go down well with some....
I think one interesting concept could be to make it so that after 3 months any
feedback
that has not been left automatically turns into a Neutral which would probably
mean about 30% of any sellers feedback will no doubt be made up of Neutrals which
might then make leaving a manual Neutral seem less Negative and more acceptable
for a buyer to submit and for a seller to receive?
A seller could say why should I have to accept receiving Neutrals just because
a buyer couldn’t be bothered to leave feedback but firstly you have to remember
that the same situation will occur for everyone so that shouldn’t matter too
much especially if Neutral is more commonly expected however my theory is that
those customers that are particularly happy with their order be that because
it shipped quickly, well packaged, great parts, no fees, reasonable shipping
cost etc, etc.. are much more likely to WANT to let the seller know its arrived
and they are very happy with everything.
If a customer is left pondering because they are disgruntled about a couple of
things they may then be more inclined to leave Neutral or let it turn to a Neutral
automatically rather than leaving the usual somewhat less than deserved Positive
rating!
My other theory is that you may actually get more people choosing to leave feedback
in the first place because they may not want the seller to receive an automated
Neutral from them but on the other hand this option allows those buyers that
don’t want to leave feedback for a seller who delivered a less than perfect transaction
the option to allow it to just turn to a Neutral.
If you think about it every transaction would be destined to become a Neutral
feedback and only those that specifically choose to give Positive or Negative
will change that eventuality which would probably make more sense?
Therefore two sellers with 100 feedback instead of looking almost identical may
end up looking very different based on their overall performance:-
Or at least that’s the theory if you go by the law of averages when it comes
to those that don’t leave any feedback and then add to that all those who had
previously been holding back with giving sellers a Neutral rating!
No! No feedback isn't a positive, neutral or a negativ feedback!
The topic of Neutral feedback and how they are seen as minor negatives comes
up
quite a lot and although I’m sure this idea may not go down well with some....
I think one interesting concept could be to make it so that after 3 months any
feedback
that has not been left automatically turns into a Neutral which would probably
mean about 30% of any sellers feedback will no doubt be made up of Neutrals which
might then make leaving a manual Neutral seem less Negative and more acceptable
for a buyer to submit and for a seller to receive?
A seller could say why should I have to accept receiving Neutrals just because
a buyer couldn’t be bothered to leave feedback but firstly you have to remember
that the same situation will occur for everyone so that shouldn’t matter too
much especially if Neutral is more commonly expected however my theory is that
those customers that are particularly happy with their order be that because
it shipped quickly, well packaged, great parts, no fees, reasonable shipping
cost etc, etc.. are much more likely to WANT to let the seller know its arrived
and they are very happy with everything.
If a customer is left pondering because they are disgruntled about a couple of
things they may then be more inclined to leave Neutral or let it turn to a Neutral
automatically rather than leaving the usual somewhat less than deserved Positive
rating!
My other theory is that you may actually get more people choosing to leave feedback
in the first place because they may not want the seller to receive an automated
Neutral from them but on the other hand this option allows those buyers that
don’t want to leave feedback for a seller who delivered a less than perfect transaction
the option to allow it to just turn to a Neutral.
If you think about it every transaction would be destined to become a Neutral
feedback and only those that specifically choose to give Positive or Negative
will change that eventuality which would probably make more sense?
Therefore two sellers with 100 feedback instead of looking almost identical may
end up looking very different based on their overall performance:-
Or at least that’s the theory if you go by the law of averages when it comes
to those that don’t leave any feedback and then add to that all those who had
previously been holding back with giving sellers a Neutral rating!
I understand your reasoning but this is not a good idea IMO. As the other commenter
said, most buyers that don't leave feedback are happy, but can't be bothered
or don't even know how to do it!
I understand your reasoning but this is not a good idea IMO. As the other commenter
said, most buyers that don't leave feedback are happy, but can't be bothered
or don't even know how to do it!
I appreciate what you’re saying but I think your head is still seeing Neutral
as it is seen today which is a Minor Negative whereas if Neutral is deemed as
just that, 'A Neutral’ i.e No comment, can’t be bothered to comment, good
transaction, okay transaction or indifferent about the transaction then maybe
Neutral is a better reflection compared with someone making the effort to go
out of their way with specifically wanting to leave a positive comment?
I understand your reasoning but this is not a good idea IMO. As the other commenter
said, most buyers that don't leave feedback are happy, but can't be bothered
or don't even know how to do it!
I appreciate what you’re saying but I think your head is still seeing Neutral
as it is seen today which is a Minor Negative whereas if Neutral is deemed as
just that, 'A Neutral’ i.e No comment, can’t be bothered to comment, good
transaction, okay transaction or indifferent about the transaction then maybe
Neutral is a better reflection compared with someone making the effort to go
out of their way with specifically wanting to leave a positive comment?
In my opinion neutral doesn't mean just cant be bothered to comment. Good
transaction and ok transaction are positive, right?
Neutral means, not good, not bad. Not average, since average is good (or so I
hope! ). I think that the problem may be that you are looking at neutral
as average, and average in buyers feelings is not neutral... again, I HOPE. There
were some problems that may have been fixed in a way that you were OK, not as
happy as you should have been but still not angry.
In my opinion neutral doesn't mean just cant be bothered to comment. Good
transaction and ok transaction are positive, right?
Neutral means, not good, not bad. Not average, since average is good (or so I
hope! ). I think that the problem may be that you are looking at neutral
as average, and average in buyers feelings is not neutral... again, I HOPE. There
were some problems that may have been fixed in a way that you were OK, not as
happy as you should have been but still not angry.
Well I think the whole intention of ‘Neutral’ was to mean the transaction was
okay or you were somewhat indifferent about it therefore not leaving any feedback
and it reverting to Neutral would seem quite fitting as you are neither happy
nor dissatisfied also in war Neutral would mean impartial and not choosing to
take sides or participate also if you have a performer on stage and some people
boo! Presumably the performer will see that as a negative, those that clap will
be appreciated as a positive gesture but will the performer have a problem with
those that neither clap nor boo who just quietly watch?
The topic of Neutral feedback and how they are seen as minor negatives comes
up
quite a lot and although I’m sure this idea may not go down well with some....
I think one interesting concept could be to make it so that after 3 months any
feedback
that has not been left automatically turns into a Neutral which would probably
mean about 30% of any sellers feedback will no doubt be made up of Neutrals which
might then make leaving a manual Neutral seem less Negative and more acceptable
for a buyer to submit and for a seller to receive?
Huh? So I do not get to have any choice or say in my feedback now? Also, I have
waited as a buyer for many parcels for longer than 4 months, so how can there
be feedback already if I do not even have the parcel yet?
I would rather sellers manage their stores properly than for them to spend time
and effort managing their feedback scores.
Huh? So I do not get to have any choice or say in my feedback now? Also, I have
waited as a buyer for many parcels for longer than 4 months, so how can there
be feedback already if I do not even have the parcel yet?
Of course you get a choice. You can leave Positive, Neutral or Negative?? and
if you are waiting longer than 4 months for a parcel to arrive your choice of
feedback for a seller should be a very easy in my view besides it does'nt
have to be automated at 3 months could be 4, 5, 6 months or whatever....
I would rather sellers manage their stores properly than for them to spend time
and effort managing their feedback scores.
Perhaps if sellers feedback scores were affected more drastically they may then
start to do this? Why do you think I make this suggestion in the first place?
Every seller looks the same and expects the same positive feedback even though
they underperform compared to other sellers?
Huh? So I do not get to have any choice or say in my feedback now? Also, I have
waited as a buyer for many parcels for longer than 4 months, so how can there
be feedback already if I do not even have the parcel yet?
Of course you get a choice. You can leave Positive, Neutral or Negative?? and
if you are waiting longer than 4 months for a parcel to arrive your choice of
feedback for a seller should be a very easy in my view
No - it has nothing to do with the seller but with customs, shipping routes and
delivery options such as letters v parcels/cheap v expensive. If the seller packs
and ships within terms he is entitled to a positive feedback irrespective; if
the postal service has no direct flight routing here or if customs officials
are on strike, then that has nothing to do with the seller or feedback or even
the transaction. The feedback is for the seller, not the postal service, customs
officials, airlines, vehicle manufacturers or bicycle spares suppliers (or in
our case still - shoe leather suppliers).
besides it does'nt
have to be automated at 3 months could be 4, 5, 6 months or whatever....
I still would not want BL to determine what I must do for a buy transaction.
I would rather sellers manage their stores properly than for them to spend time
and effort managing their feedback scores.
Perhaps if sellers feedback scores were affected more drastically they may then
start to do this?
So a seller who bully a buyer into positive feedback is a better store than a
seller who ships to terms?
Why do you think I make this suggestion in the first place?
Every seller looks the same and expects the same positive feedback even though
they underperform compared to other sellers?
Sellers look the same because that is the result of a broken feedback system
and a broken contracting system. A subjective matter such as feedback, has nothing
to do with a measurable and reportable benchmark system for performance. What
is the performance benchmark and who would deermine that underperformance? This
is the trouble when stores manage feedback. As a buyer I expect a seller to do
a few things such as at least fill in my customs docs correctly, ship new when
I order new and ship within terms. This is very simple.
Perhaps a proper example will do (I did not include examples earlier for the
sake of brevity):
I placed an order for new minifigs, the seller shipped to his terms, kept proof
of shipping but did not complete the customs documents correctly, despite me
instructing him what to do. The parcel arrived in +- 60 days with extra customs
charges, no sweat. The minifigs were used. The seller did not respond to any
queries, NSS opened, NSS completed, PayPal claim for cost of minifigs and pro-rata
shipping costs, customs and VAT opened after NSS was proven, escalated and completed.
At no point did the seller defend his incorrect listing.
The seller has subsequently relisted almost all of his minifigs to used. The
seller has stoplisted me. There is no question in my mind that this seller does
not deserve a negative or even a neutral now. That would penalising the
seller further for no purpose. The seller took it upon himself to improve his
store, so there is no purpose to leave a neutral feedback since I had no loss.
In this instance I chose to leave no feedback. I would not wish that to be be
replaced by some automated feature that forces me to do a thing I do not want
to do. It is my decision to place an order and what I make of the outcome of
that order, is not preconceived and should not be determined by BL or anybody
else.
I hope there will come this moment
when neutral will become REAL neutral.
The stubbornness in this matter is annoying.
What the big deal to change it to REAL neutral?
I just don't get it... and whatever the answer would be...
I'll not agree
[…]
A seller could say why should I have to accept receiving Neutrals just because
a buyer couldn’t be bothered to leave feedback but firstly you have to remember
that the same situation will occur for everyone so that shouldn’t matter too
much […]
Except that, and that the everpresent flaw / unanswered problem with propositions
to change the feedback system, there’s the historical feeeback to consider.
Would you want all previous transactions with no FB to become neutrals? Or would
it only apply to future transactions?
Is that fair for new members? Or to older members?
Those FB were left (or rather, not left¹) when the system was that they would
stay this way, not when they would become neutrals after a while.
The current (Saussurean) system is not “Good, Neutral, Bad,” it’s “Good, None,
Neutral, Bad.”
If you want to remove “None,” you’re losing information.
¹ Is a “not left” feedback a “right” feedback? (Hmm, isn’t that why PurpleDave
never leave FB?)
[…]
A seller could say why should I have to accept receiving Neutrals just because
a buyer couldn’t be bothered to leave feedback but firstly you have to remember
that the same situation will occur for everyone so that shouldn’t matter too
much […]
Except that, and that the everpresent flaw / unanswered problem with propositions
to change the feedback system, there’s the historical feeeback to consider.
Would you want all previous transactions with no FB to become neutrals? Or would
it only apply to future transactions?
Is that fair for new members? Or to older members?
Those FB were left (or rather, not left¹) when the system was that they would
stay this way, not when they would become neutrals after a while.
The current (Saussurean) system is not “Good, Neutral, Bad,” it’s “Good, None,
Neutral, Bad.”
If you want to remove “None,” you’re losing information.
Agreed. Add the total number of orders information. Then it is simple mathematics
how many feedback None = total number of orders minus Good, Neutral, Bad.
¹ Is a “not left” feedback a “right” feedback? (Hmm, isn’t that why PurpleDave
never leave FB?)
[…]
A seller could say why should I have to accept receiving Neutrals just because
a buyer couldn’t be bothered to leave feedback but firstly you have to remember
that the same situation will occur for everyone so that shouldn’t matter too
much […]
Except that, and that the everpresent flaw / unanswered problem with propositions
to change the feedback system, there’s the historical feeeback to consider.
Would you want all previous transactions with no FB to become neutrals? Or would
it only apply to future transactions?
Is that fair for new members? Or to older members?
Those FB were left (or rather, not left¹) when the system was that they would
stay this way, not when they would become neutrals after a while.
The current (Saussurean) system is not “Good, Neutral, Bad,” it’s “Good, None,
Neutral, Bad.”
If you want to remove “None,” you’re losing information.
¹ Is a “not left” feedback a “right” feedback? (Hmm, isn’t that why PurpleDave
never leave FB?)
Like I say it’s just an idea to spark some debate I don’t necessarily have all
the answers that would be up to Bricklink themselves but it’s unlikely to change
anyway and even less so now people have responded to it like a Lead balloon but
hey ebay made a similar change where you only now see a year’s worth of transactions,
I’m sure that upset many people at the time especially those with flawless track
records but it didn’t stop ebay from doing it anyway because I think they recognised
the long term benefits!
The thing is when all said and done a lot of people just don’t like change either
because they prefer the existing method or they prefer to hold onto the comfort
of what they’ve always known and trust? However when change finally comes a lot
of people complain at first but then when they get used to it they actually prefer
things not to go back to the way they were before!
[…]
Like I say it’s just an idea to spark some debate
And debate there was.
I don’t necessarily have all
the answers that would be up to Bricklink themselves but it’s unlikely to change
anyway and even less so now people have responded to it like a Lead balloon
Sure you don’t have all the answers, we don’t either. But that doesn’t prevent
us from finding the questions.
Because I believe ideas thrown around without trying to dig a bit deeper make
poor suggestions.
And I believe you believe that too because you just said you wanted to spark
some debate.
A debate isn’t “yeah, let’s go for it.” It’s trying to find pros and cons and
questions.
Sure, cons are always a bit more vocal or blunt.
And questions often appear to be cons (which they are not necessarily, unless
they are sarcastic).
But that’s the purpose of the debate: finding what other people think, what’s
their point of view, using their own vision to criticize your idea, because your
own PoV isn’t sufficient.
but
hey ebay made a similar change where you only now see a year’s worth of transactions,
I’m sure that upset many people at the time especially those with flawless track
records but it didn’t stop ebay from doing it anyway because I think they recognised
the long term benefits!
BL also changed a bit, at least in the way the stats are presented to buyers
in stores.
The thing is when all said and done a lot of people just don’t like change either
because they prefer the existing method or they prefer to hold onto the comfort
of what they’ve always known and trust? However when change finally comes a lot
of people complain at first but then when they get used to it they actually prefer
things not to go back to the way they were before!
And that’s always the answer when people try to discuss an idea, “people don’t
like change.”
Guh.
You make a suggestion, we discuss it, pros AND cons AND questions.
That’s not “not liking change.” That’s how creation works: you throw an idea,
you criticize it, you throw other ideas to answer the questions, alleviate the
cons or further the pros, you criticize again, and so on.
And BL is certainly not going to consider it if it’s just a half-baked idea.
[…]
Like I say it’s just an idea to spark some debate
And debate there was.
I don’t necessarily have all
the answers that would be up to Bricklink themselves but it’s unlikely to change
anyway and even less so now people have responded to it like a Lead balloon
Sure you don’t have all the answers, we don’t either. But that doesn’t prevent
us from finding the questions.
Because I believe ideas thrown around without trying to dig a bit deeper make
poor suggestions.
And I believe you believe that too because you just said you wanted to spark
some debate.
A debate isn’t “yeah, let’s go for it.” It’s trying to find pros and cons and
questions.
Sure, cons are always a bit more vocal or blunt.
And questions often appear to be cons (which they are not necessarily, unless
they are sarcastic).
But that’s the purpose of the debate: finding what other people think, what’s
their point of view, using their own vision to criticize your idea, because your
own PoV isn’t sufficient.
but
hey ebay made a similar change where you only now see a year’s worth of transactions,
I’m sure that upset many people at the time especially those with flawless track
records but it didn’t stop ebay from doing it anyway because I think they recognised
the long term benefits!
BL also changed a bit, at least in the way the stats are presented to buyers
in stores.
The thing is when all said and done a lot of people just don’t like change either
because they prefer the existing method or they prefer to hold onto the comfort
of what they’ve always known and trust? However when change finally comes a lot
of people complain at first but then when they get used to it they actually prefer
things not to go back to the way they were before!
And that’s always the answer when people try to discuss an idea, “people don’t
like change.”
Guh.
You make a suggestion, we discuss it, pros AND cons AND questions.
That’s not “not liking change.” That’s how creation works: you throw an idea,
you criticize it, you throw other ideas to answer the questions, alleviate the
cons or further the pros, you criticize again, and so on.
And BL is certainly not going to consider it if it’s just a half-baked idea.
You make it sound like I have a problem with people disagreeing or criticizing
an idea I’ve put forward.... I really don’t but then if people criticize and
question why I even put forward such a half-baked idea in the first place then
that’s a different thing. Half-baked ideas can become fully baked ideas when
other minds and suggestion are brought together!
Here’s something my old boss once said to me while we were brainstorming...
"Even if you think it might be a stupid idea, say it!"
He then went onto to tell me all about the Mars confectionary breakthrough where
they discussed what to do about the large decline in the sale of chocolate bars
during the hot summer months. Someone in the room suggested making Icecream chocolate
bars and everyone laughed! Fortunately one senior person in the room took that
idea a little more seriously and the Mars Icecream bar was born and since then
nearly every other chocolate company has copied that idea and made icecream versions
of their own bars!
As for the ‘Sometimes people don’t like change’ comment I stand by that because
often its quite true and whilst I’ll admit that ebay have made some bad changes
that haven’t been very well thought through most of their many changes have been
very successful and improved the site dramatically despite ebay having to face
initial criticism from people
Either way whether it’s a bad idea or not some will disagree anyway simply
because it means they will have to raise their standards or simply because they
like to shoot down ideas and disagree for the sake of disagreeing! I could even
question your own motives? You don’t sell, you rarely buy, but you seem to have
a very strong opinion on most matters when it comes to ideas or suggestions in
the forum even though they don't directly affect you?... Just saying!
Even though you are of course as entitled as anyone to voice an opinion!
Again its not my prefered option but I'm just looking at ways to help improve
sellers standards. I'd rather see sellers unable to leave retaliatory feedback
for buyers but that does'nt seem to go down well with many people either,
or is that simply because those that voice their opinion against the idea don't
want to lose the hold they currently have over their customers? Whatever suggestions
are put forward those that strongly oppose an idea are more likely to reply in
the forum than those that don't!
[…]
You make it sound like I have a problem with people disagreeing or criticizing
an idea I’ve put forward....
That’s what saying “people don’t like change” make it seem to me.
I really don’t but then if people criticize and
question why I even put forward such a half-baked idea in the first place then
that’s a different thing. Half-baked ideas can become fully baked ideas when
other minds and suggestion are brought together! […]
Agreed.
Either way whether it’s a bad idea or not some will disagree anyway simply
because it means they will have to raise their standards or simply because they
like to shoot down ideas and disagree for the sake of disagreeing!
Yes, but by repeating “people don’t like change”, you make genuine questions
and critics sound like epidermic reactions or even trolling.
I could even
question your own motives? You don’t sell, you rarely buy, but you seem to have
a very strong opinion on most matters when it comes to ideas or suggestions in
the forum even though they don't directly affect you?... Just saying!
Even though you are of course as entitled as anyone to voice an opinion!
My motives for answering on the forum are simple:
If it’s a question, I try to give an answer. Either because I know it, or because
no one has given one yet and I think I can find it or help find it (and am in
the mood to search for it ).
If it’s a debate (that includes suggestions), as the saying goes, opinions are
like …, everyone has one, the matter affecting them directly or not.
More, I think the PoV of someone who has no horse (or only a tiny pony) in the
race is as interesting as the PoVs of those who have a bone to defend.
Again its not my prefered option but I'm just looking at ways to help improve
sellers standards. I'd rather see sellers unable to leave retaliatory feedback
for buyers but that does'nt seem to go down well with many people either,
or is that simply because those that voice their opinion against the idea don't
want to lose the hold they currently have over their customers? Whatever suggestions
are put forward those that strongly oppose an idea are more likely to reply in
the forum than those that don't!
As you remarked, I have no real bone in this race (no horse to defend?), so what
I did in my first answer is what I explained in the second: I put on my critic
hat. That generally means I find flaws and questions more easily than praises.
I believe people work like that, even unconsciously. Their first reaction is
“what could go wrong” (or “what will go wrong” for the more pessimistic ).
It often is “what could go wrong FOR ME” because, of course, “me” is important
to them but also because it’s their PoV, what they know.
I don’t believe it’s the “I don’t like change” cliché.
you make genuine questions and critics sound like epidermic reactions or even trolling.
Well there are some people that disagree and critic who and are able to be diplomatic
and constructive with their replies (brikomania, rankster to name a couple) there
are others and not just in this topic who intentionally or not do not seem to
have this ability and yet turning a blind eye to how other people respond? You
question how I respond to those types of responses?
epidermic reactions as you put it are common in this forum either to help entrench
ones position among others or to jump on the bandwagon in order shoot down those
who have disagreed with them in the past or maybe simply because they have a
general intolerance to anyone who is able to conduct themselves in a more level
headed and appropriate manor than they themselves are? Either way I really hope
this type of thing doesn’t ever put others off from putting forward their own
suggestions in the forum? It certainly won’t ever stop me...
Author:
Heartbricker
Posted:
Apr 12, 2020 22:41
Subject:
Re: Just a (DANGEROUS) idea about Neutral Feedback
The topic of Neutral feedback and how they are seen as minor negatives comes
up
quite a lot and although I’m sure this idea may not go down well with some....
I think one interesting concept could be to make it so that after 3 months any
feedback
that has not been left automatically turns into a Neutral which would probably
mean about 30% of any sellers feedback will no doubt be made up of Neutrals which
might then make leaving a manual Neutral seem less Negative and more acceptable
for a buyer to submit and for a seller to receive?
A seller could say why should I have to accept receiving Neutrals just because
a buyer couldn’t be bothered to leave feedback but firstly you have to remember
that the same situation will occur for everyone so that shouldn’t matter too
much especially if Neutral is more commonly expected however my theory is that
those customers that are particularly happy with their order be that because
it shipped quickly, well packaged, great parts, no fees, reasonable shipping
cost etc, etc.. are much more likely to WANT to let the seller know its arrived
and they are very happy with everything.
If a customer is left pondering because they are disgruntled about a couple of
things they may then be more inclined to leave Neutral or let it turn to a Neutral
automatically rather than leaving the usual somewhat less than deserved Positive
rating!
My other theory is that you may actually get more people choosing to leave feedback
in the first place because they may not want the seller to receive an automated
Neutral from them but on the other hand this option allows those buyers that
don’t want to leave feedback for a seller who delivered a less than perfect transaction
the option to allow it to just turn to a Neutral.
If you think about it every transaction would be destined to become a Neutral
feedback and only those that specifically choose to give Positive or Negative
will change that eventuality which would probably make more sense?
Therefore two sellers with 100 feedback instead of looking almost identical may
end up looking very different based on their overall performance:-
Or at least that’s the theory if you go by the law of averages when it comes
to those that don’t leave any feedback and then add to that all those who had
previously been holding back with giving sellers a Neutral rating!
This is a DANGEROUS suggestion- You're not realistic and this suggestion
doesn't fit with the current culture of feedback here on Bricklink or anywhere
else i can think of, here is why:
-IF/When a buyer leaves a positive FB - the buyer believes you did your job well
and checked all the boxes of their expectations (like speed, accuracy, packaging,
item condition, customer service etc.) buyers needs are not uniform as each buyer
(or human for that matter) is a unique wonderful snowflake with different expectations.
-When a buyer leaves a neutral feedback, it usually means that the seller has
only met some of their expectations on most of those items i mentioned but has
fallen short on some of their expectations (shipped slower, didn't respond
to a message etc.)
-And a negative is just that- seller has not met buyer's expectations.
Getting a wholesale neutral amount of feedback like that will suck the fun out
of selling and can also give buyers the perception that sellers are not entirely
meeting expectations therefore- DANGEROUS.
Leaving a feedback is always an intentional act- not leaving a feedback it not
necessarily intentional.
I have a few buyers who have placed dozens of orders in my shop (couple of them
over 40) and not a single feedback. but the best feedback is repeated business!
who cares if no one can see that type of repeat business feedback- that's
the only feedback we can pay the bills with.
Author:
infinibrix
Posted:
Apr 13, 2020 05:32
Subject:
Re: Just a (DANGEROUS) idea about Neutral Feedback
This is a DANGEROUS suggestion- You're not realistic and this suggestion
doesn't fit with the current culture of feedback here on Bricklink or anywhere
else i can think of, here is why:
-IF/When a buyer leaves a positive FB - the buyer believes you did your job well
and checked all the boxes of their expectations (like speed, accuracy, packaging,
item condition, customer service etc.) buyers needs are not uniform as each buyer
(or human for that matter) is a unique wonderful snowflake with different expectations.
-When a buyer leaves a neutral feedback, it usually means that the seller has
only met some of their expectations on most of those items i mentioned but has
fallen short on some of their expectations (shipped slower, didn't respond
to a message etc.)
-And a negative is just that- seller has not met buyer's expectations.
Getting a wholesale neutral amount of feedback like that will suck the fun out
of selling and can also give buyers the perception that sellers are not entirely
meeting expectations therefore- DANGEROUS.
Leaving a feedback is always an intentional act- not leaving a feedback it not
necessarily intentional.
I have a few buyers who have placed dozens of orders in my shop (couple of them
over 40) and not a single feedback. but the best feedback is repeated business!
who cares if no one can see that type of repeat business feedback- that's
the only feedback we can pay the bills with.
A little over dramatic but your right it’s DANGEROURS so lock me up, remove my
selling privileges and block me from the forum for ever coming up with such a
suggestion!
That way it can never happen again and everyone will remain safe!
Author:
Heartbricker
Posted:
Apr 13, 2020 09:56
Subject:
Re: Just a (DANGEROUS) idea about Neutral Feedback
This is a DANGEROUS suggestion- You're not realistic and this suggestion
doesn't fit with the current culture of feedback here on Bricklink or anywhere
else i can think of, here is why:
-IF/When a buyer leaves a positive FB - the buyer believes you did your job well
and checked all the boxes of their expectations (like speed, accuracy, packaging,
item condition, customer service etc.) buyers needs are not uniform as each buyer
(or human for that matter) is a unique wonderful snowflake with different expectations.
-When a buyer leaves a neutral feedback, it usually means that the seller has
only met some of their expectations on most of those items i mentioned but has
fallen short on some of their expectations (shipped slower, didn't respond
to a message etc.)
-And a negative is just that- seller has not met buyer's expectations.
Getting a wholesale neutral amount of feedback like that will suck the fun out
of selling and can also give buyers the perception that sellers are not entirely
meeting expectations therefore- DANGEROUS.
Leaving a feedback is always an intentional act- not leaving a feedback it not
necessarily intentional.
I have a few buyers who have placed dozens of orders in my shop (couple of them
over 40) and not a single feedback. but the best feedback is repeated business!
who cares if no one can see that type of repeat business feedback- that's
the only feedback we can pay the bills with.
A little over dramatic but your right it’s DANGEROURS so lock me up, remove my
selling privileges and block me from the forum for ever coming up with such a
suggestion!
That way it can never happen again and everyone will remain safe!
I do have a flare for the dramatics you obviously have the right to post
whatever you want just as others have the right to voice their opinions.
Dangerous referred to hurting sales and livelihood of some sellers and admittedly
to capture the eye and interest the reader to my post - I am a sales person after
all.
Best wishes.
What about leaving POSITIVE feedback automatically right before the order purges
from the system? Both seller and buyer have 6 months to do so manually. I think
most of the times feedbacks are not left just because of laziness or ignorance
but obviously if the buyer hasn't contacted the seller or left neutal/negative
feedback in 6 months that probably means everything is fine with the order so
positive feedback should be received (for both sides).
The topic of Neutral feedback and how they are seen as minor negatives comes
up
quite a lot and although I’m sure this idea may not go down well with some....
I think one interesting concept could be to make it so that after 3 months any
feedback
that has not been left automatically turns into a Neutral which would probably
mean about 30% of any sellers feedback will no doubt be made up of Neutrals which
might then make leaving a manual Neutral seem less Negative and more acceptable
for a buyer to submit and for a seller to receive?
....
And same should apply to buyers too, right? Sellers stop leaving feedback and
every buyer ends up with all neutrals. That oughta be fair.
United Kingdom, England
Luxembourg
Spain, Andalucia Ceuta i Melilla
). I think that the problem may be that you are looking at neutral
South Africa
USA, Illinois
France, Nouvelle-Aquitaine
Netherlands, Overijssel
).
Austria, Wien
Finland