I have had several new users quick to give neutrals or negatives before even
saying there was an issue. This shouldn't be the case. People should be required
to contact first before posting a neutrals or negatives feedback.
sadly it happens sometimes but that could be a neat feature if you weren't
allowed to leave neutral or negative unless you first contacted the seller
Blocking buyers from leaving feedback is not a good idea if there is a scam.
Presumably your idea of not allowing neutral or negative feedback unless contact
is made would require time for the seller to respond (otherwise contact is pointless),
and if the scammer doesn't respond then they can avoid getting negative feedback
for a few more days.
sadly it happens sometimes but that could be a neat feature if you weren't
allowed to leave neutral or negative unless you first contacted the seller
Blocking buyers from leaving feedback is not a good idea if there is a scam.
Presumably your idea of not allowing neutral or negative feedback unless contact
is made
That’s what I said
would require time for the seller to respond (otherwise contact is pointless),
and if the scammer doesn't respond then they can avoid getting negative feedback
for a few more days.
Yes it won’t be completely issue proof but since most customers just leave neutral
or negative without response a note “forcing” them to communicate could help
prevent lots of tension. Things like NPB and NSS take a few days so why not add
a 48-72 hour wait period after contacting a seller in order to be able to leave
neutral or negative so that most issues could be resolved and everyone walks
away happy
sadly it happens sometimes but that could be a neat feature if you weren't
allowed to leave neutral or negative unless you first contacted the seller
Blocking buyers from leaving feedback is not a good idea if there is a scam.
Presumably your idea of not allowing neutral or negative feedback unless contact
is made
That’s what I said
I interpret your post as saying it would be good if you are forced to contact
the seller before you can leave non-positive feedback. In my view, that is not
good as in some cases (scams) being forced to contact a seller slows down warning
others, or opens you to further abusive if the seller has already been abusive.
Yes but for every 1 scam out there, there is 100+ (probably) just minor issues.
Also there could then be an option maybe for if it’s a scam to then post a special
message which notifies the help desk also and let’s them post it right away
Yes but for every 1 scam out there, there is 100+ (probably) just minor issues.
Also there could then be an option maybe for if it’s a scam to then post a special
message which notifies the help desk also and let’s them post it right away
As soon as there are options to get round it, then it becomes pointless.
A seller sends used parts instead of new or parts are in bad condition, the buyer
is disappointed and thinks they've been scammed, so they use the scam button.
I'd prefer to see a two step process for neutrals and negatives, where the
leaver is asked on the next page are they sure they want to do that, reminders
about have they tried to resolve any problems, etc. But not a ban on them leaving
warning feedback for others unless they jump through hoops they feel they don't
want to have to jump through, especially if this causes delays.
Yes but for every 1 scam out there, there is 100+ (probably) just minor issues.
Also there could then be an option maybe for if it’s a scam to then post a special
message which notifies the help desk also and let’s them post it right away
As soon as there are options to get round it, then it becomes pointless.
I was gunna make a joke involving tax fraud but since it’s tax season I don’t
want to risk it but just since there is a “workaround” dosnt mean something
is pointless
A seller sends used parts instead of new or parts are in bad condition, the buyer
is disappointed and thinks they've been scammed, so they use the scam button.
That’s why it would be something that they properly explain what qualifies for
it instead of just 1 line saying try messaging the seller first
I'd prefer to see a two step process for neutrals and negatives, where the
leaver is asked on the next page are they sure they want to do that, reminders
about have they tried to resolve any problems, etc. But not a ban on them leaving
warning feedback for others unless they jump through hoops they feel they don't
want to have to jump through, especially if this causes delays.
+1 in order words but yes their should be something better for the process as
many of the issues with orders could easily be solved without issues if buyers
were better prompted to contact sellers instead of just leaving feedback
I have had several new users quick to give neutrals or negatives before even
saying there was an issue. This shouldn't be the case. People should be required
to contact first before posting a neutrals or negatives feedback.
As a buyer I agree this would be a great suggestion to implement. Too often I
read posts in the forum and on other social media sites where sellers are slamming
all buyers for not contacting the seller first. There are some really jilted
sellers out there.
It would be nice to have a "Welcome to Bricklink, here you can find links
to help you navigate the site and some helpful tips on buying and selling."
that pops up as soon as a new member registers. I think this would alleviate
some of the problems that arise and help new members!
I have had several new users quick to give neutrals or negatives before even
saying there was an issue. This shouldn't be the case. People should be required
to contact first before posting a neutrals or negatives feedback.
Newbies always get extra attention from me.
I let them know through an email first how things work and that if they have
any questions to ask.
Again in the invoice I tell them to ask if they have any questions and finally
in the drive through.
I even let them know they can cancel an order, but to always talk to the seller.
So far, so good and they all seem to appreciate the attention I give them.
I have had several new users quick to give neutrals or negatives before even
saying there was an issue. This shouldn't be the case. People should be required
to contact first before posting a neutrals or negatives feedback.
Seller behaviour could also be to blame. The last negative you have for broken
parts is not a new user. They also had an issue with another seller where they
seem to have had missing parts and it appears to be unresolved, swapping neutral
feedback. If based on past experience they think sellers won't correct their
errors, then they might not see the point of telling the seller.
I have had several new users quick to give neutrals or negatives before even
saying there was an issue. This shouldn't be the case. People should be required
to contact first before posting a neutrals or negatives feedback.
I believe you should be strongly encouraged to contact your seller first, but
that it should not be required.
I have had several new users quick to give neutrals or negatives before even
saying there was an issue. This shouldn't be the case. People should be required
to contact first before posting a neutrals or negatives feedback.
I believe you should be strongly encouraged to contact your seller first, but
that it should not be required.
I have had several new users quick to give neutrals or negatives before even
saying there was an issue. This shouldn't be the case. People should be required
to contact first before posting a neutrals or negatives feedback.
I believe you should be strongly encouraged to contact your seller first, but
that it should not be required.
~Jen
Maybe there could be a note and button that says "you can contact your seller
to resolve most issues". Then have a default generated email. Then still
have a "continue placing a negative feedback"
Though it could put pressure on the sellers that dont like/want to communicate
Maybe there could be a note and button that says "you can contact your seller
to resolve most issues". Then have a default generated email. Then still
have a "continue placing a negative feedback"
Though it could put pressure on the sellers that dont like/want to communicate
That could be an idea.
For non positive (Praise) feedback, it could be mandatory.
First send a message (more than 10 words ?), then only you can put such a feedback.
Maybe it'll help in communicating before showing you're not happy?
Maybe there could be a note and button that says "you can contact your seller
to resolve most issues". Then have a default generated email. Then still
have a "continue placing a negative feedback"
Though it could put pressure on the sellers that dont like/want to communicate
That could be an idea.
For non positive (Praise) feedback, it could be mandatory.
First send a message (more than 10 words ?), then only you can put such a feedback.
Maybe it'll help in communicating before showing you're not happy?
IDK, just an idea...
Maybe buyers could opt into allowing a negotiating process, the ones that dont
just get the feedback the buyer posts without interuption?
Maybe there could be a note and button that says "you can contact your seller
to resolve most issues". Then have a default generated email. Then still
have a "continue placing a negative feedback"
Though it could put pressure on the sellers that dont like/want to communicate
That could be an idea.
For non positive (Praise) feedback, it could be mandatory.
First send a message (more than 10 words ?), then only you can put such a feedback.
Maybe it'll help in communicating before showing you're not happy?
IDK, just an idea...
And if you are forced to write a message before leaving neut /neg feedback, are
you forced to wait for a response? If so, for how long?
I think it's an incentive (an obligation in fact) to communicate a bit.
+1 I think on the radioactive decay rhyming site you can’t just leave negative
or neutral without same other requirements being met first which works well
Or a said Nubs, to instead of the FB, offer the possibility to transform to NPB/NSS..
Not quite the aproach I was going for but that kinda makes sense also
I think it's an incentive (an obligation in fact) to communicate a bit.
+1 I think on the radioactive decay rhyming site you can’t just leave negative
or neutral without same other requirements being met first which works well
Ah, good infos, thanks!
Apart I don't know what you mean about the site
I think it's an incentive (an obligation in fact) to communicate a bit.
+1 I think on the radioactive decay rhyming site you can’t just leave negative
or neutral without same other requirements being met first which works well
Ah, good infos, thanks!
Apart I don't know what you mean about the site
I think it's an incentive (an obligation in fact) to communicate a bit.
+1 I think on the radioactive decay rhyming site you can’t just leave negative
or neutral without same other requirements being met first which works well
Ah, good infos, thanks!
Apart I don't know what you mean about the site
No, sincerely? You can name the site, you're not promoting it neither link
to it.
I have had several new users quick to give neutrals or negatives before even
saying there was an issue. This shouldn't be the case. People should be required
to contact first before posting a neutrals or negatives feedback.
I think that if a member wants to leave neutral or negative feedback, that they
should automatically be taken to the "Issue with order" page, and asked
first to submit an issue report with their order. The system should automatically
submit such issue reports via the BrickLink messaging system to both members
involved, so that there is a record of the reason for submitting a neutral or
negative feedback.
It does not matter if they should wait for a response, neutral or negative feedback
that turns out to be retaliatory or abusive can be removed through the feedback
removal process that already exists.
What is needed is for issue reports to be easy and simple to submit to the other
member.
If the member closes the page, the system records that the member visited the
page, but did not submit any issue, and the date/time stamp for the order the
feedback was intended for.
The issue page remains visible until the member explicitly cancels it via a button
to press. Actions regarding issue reporting pages are logged by the system so
admins can see if there is any problem that has to be dealt with.
There is a lot more nowadays to leaving feedback than there was previously. If
a member experiences a connection interruption they should be able to see active
issue reports they were trying to create, and where they were up to in creation
of them, and allowed to continue if they really want to.
I think that if a member wants to leave neutral or negative feedback, that they
should automatically be taken to the "Issue with order" page, and asked
first to submit an issue report with their order. The system should automatically
submit such issue reports via the BrickLink messaging system to both members
involved, so that there is a record of the reason for submitting a neutral or
negative feedback.
It does not matter if they should wait for a response, neutral or negative feedback
that turns out to be retaliatory or abusive can be removed through the feedback
removal process that already exists.
What is needed is for issue reports to be easy and simple to submit to the other
member.
If the member closes the page, the system records that the member visited the
page, but did not submit any issue, and the date/time stamp for the order the
feedback was intended for.
The issue page remains visible until the member explicitly cancels it via a button
to press. Actions regarding issue reporting pages are logged by the system so
admins can see if there is any problem that has to be dealt with.
There is a lot more nowadays to leaving feedback than there was previously. If
a member experiences a connection interruption they should be able to see active
issue reports they were trying to create, and where they were up to in creation
of them, and allowed to continue if they really want to.
Feedback is meant to be about how you feel overall about a transaction with another
user. There should not be hoops to jump through to be allowed to leave it. If
a buyer has to list details about everything wrong with an order, so that they
can be checked by admins, chances are they won't bother with it.
If a seller shorts a buyer or sends poor quality parts, a buyer still has the
right to leave negative feedback if they feel dissatisfied with the transaction
and wants to warn others, even if the seller refunds or sends replacements. It
is how they feel, not a logged report of issues and whether they are resolved
that can be checked by admins.
There is nothing more to leaving feedback now than before. Feedback left has
always been how one person feels about how the transaction went with another
person.
Admins cannot and should not get involved, as they do not know what was received.
If a buyer says something was missing and a seller says it wasn't, there
is nothing an admin can do.
I think that if a member wants to leave neutral or negative feedback, that they
should automatically be taken to the "Issue with order" page, and asked
first to submit an issue report with their order. The system should automatically
submit such issue reports via the BrickLink messaging system to both members
involved, so that there is a record of the reason for submitting a neutral or
negative feedback.
It does not matter if they should wait for a response, neutral or negative feedback
that turns out to be retaliatory or abusive can be removed through the feedback
removal process that already exists.
What is needed is for issue reports to be easy and simple to submit to the other
member.
If the member closes the page, the system records that the member visited the
page, but did not submit any issue, and the date/time stamp for the order the
feedback was intended for.
The issue page remains visible until the member explicitly cancels it via a button
to press. Actions regarding issue reporting pages are logged by the system so
admins can see if there is any problem that has to be dealt with.
There is a lot more nowadays to leaving feedback than there was previously. If
a member experiences a connection interruption they should be able to see active
issue reports they were trying to create, and where they were up to in creation
of them, and allowed to continue if they really want to.
Feedback is meant to be about how you feel overall about a transaction with another
user. There should not be hoops to jump through to be allowed to leave it. If
a buyer has to list details about everything wrong with an order, so that they
can be checked by admins, chances are they won't bother with it.
If a seller shorts a buyer or sends poor quality parts, a buyer still has the
right to leave negative feedback if they feel dissatisfied with the transaction
and wants to warn others, even if the seller refunds or sends replacements. It
is how they feel, not a logged report of issues and whether they are resolved
that can be checked by admins.
There is nothing more to leaving feedback now than before. Feedback left has
always been how one person feels about how the transaction went with another
person.
Admins cannot and should not get involved, as they do not know what was received.
If a buyer says something was missing and a seller says it wasn't, there
is nothing an admin can do.
Feedback needs to be restructured, it cannot simply be buyer's word versus
the seller's. That leads to the abusive behavior already mentioned in this
thread.
Feedback procedure has to be revised, I'm simply giving my opinion on how
it might be done. I'm not expecting anyone to implement it that way, but
there should be a lot more to feedback than unknowingly and wrongly leaving feedback
for an order.
Because nobody is willing to revise the feedback system and improve it, this
is what we're left to deal with today.
Feedback needs to be restructured, it cannot simply be buyer's word versus
the seller's. That leads to the abusive behavior already mentioned in this
thread.
It has to be buyer's word vs seller's word unless you use an escrow type
service and that will be very expensive especially for parts orders if an independent
third party has to verify all parts in an order.
Feedback procedure has to be revised, I'm simply giving my opinion on how
it might be done. I'm not expecting anyone to implement it that way, but
there should be a lot more to feedback than unknowingly and wrongly leaving feedback
for an order.
Because nobody is willing to revise the feedback system and improve it, this
is what we're left to deal with today.
It doesn't have to be revised. Any changes would introduce as many problems
as they solve. Nobody's store is being shut down or their sales affected
because of a rare negative comment that they disagree with (whether it is false
or just a difference in opinion).
I have had several new users quick to give neutrals or negatives before even
saying there was an issue. This shouldn't be the case. People should be required
to contact first before posting a neutrals or negatives feedback.
I think that if a member wants to leave neutral or negative feedback, that they
should automatically be taken to the "Issue with order" page, and asked
first to submit an issue report with their order. The system should automatically
submit such issue reports via the BrickLink messaging system to both members
involved, so that there is a record of the reason for submitting a neutral or
negative feedback.
It does not matter if they should wait for a response, neutral or negative feedback
that turns out to be retaliatory or abusive can be removed through the feedback
removal process that already exists.
What is needed is for issue reports to be easy and simple to submit to the other
member.
If the member closes the page, the system records that the member visited the
page, but did not submit any issue, and the date/time stamp for the order the
feedback was intended for.
The issue page remains visible until the member explicitly cancels it via a button
to press. Actions regarding issue reporting pages are logged by the system so
admins can see if there is any problem that has to be dealt with.
There is a lot more nowadays to leaving feedback than there was previously. If
a member experiences a connection interruption they should be able to see active
issue reports they were trying to create, and where they were up to in creation
of them, and allowed to continue if they really want to.
Cheers ...
ghyde
+1
this is a great idea and I support it!
even ebay does not let you leave negative feedback for good sellers within the
first 7 days, thus forcing most problems have a chance to be fixed first.
USA, California
Canada, Ontario
United Kingdom, England
Netherlands, Utrecht
France, Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur
Australia, Queensland
China, Guangdong