Errors happen to all sellers (though granted at different probability). I feel
this can be addressed through the feedback system. Did the seller refund the
purchase price of the wrong item? But asking Bricklink to consider removing
selling privilege's over a genuine error does not seem like this community.
Perhaps it is a clarification issue. I have never filled out a NSS (or NPB)
form and do not know the specific questions asked. Did the seller sent something
they could have thought was correct? Is there a section where the buyer is asked
what they have attempted to resolve the issue before filing a NSS?
My suggestion is for Blicklink to help clarify whether a complaint is NSS (or
NPB) worthy on the complaint form. Specifically asking the applicant the steps
they took to resolve the issue prior to starting the formal process. Such as
communication attempts over time and the other party's response. Did the
other party offer or provide a refund? Perhaps guidance on how long is reasonable
to expect a response from the other party. Finally, specifically ask why the
other party is so egregious that they should be banned (after 3 strikes) outright,
instead of letting feeback system take it's course.
Dealing with the worst offenders will be easy. Many attempts at communication
with no Payment (NPB) or product (NSS) or refund (NSS). However, clarifying
the seriousness of this process might help build confidence in the grey areas.
An NSS can easily be removed by sending proof of shipping or proof of a refund
the the help desk so generally they arnt a big deal. Technically a buyer isn’t
doing anything wrong for filing it if they ordered a part but never got it since
the seller never shipped it. Some first message but some don’t think of that
and just try to file an NSS but it would be nice if they were first presented
with a message asking if they first tried contacting the seller about the issue
An NSS can easily be removed by sending proof of shipping or proof of a refund
the the help desk so generally they arnt a big deal. Technically a buyer isn’t
doing anything wrong for filing it if they ordered a part but never got it since
the seller never shipped it. Some first message but some don’t think of that
and just try to file an NSS but it would be nice if they were first presented
with a message asking if they first tried contacting the seller about the issue
I see this has come up yet again. It clearly is a big deal to those who receive
the feedback, even if it’s potentially temporary.
Whether or not the buyer did something wrong (not the right word in this context)
addresses the heart of what I believe should be clarified. We have two distinct
systems for addressing order problems. The first is the feedback system and
the other is NSS / NPB. Both in addition to the basic talking to each other
through messages. Everything could quite easily go through either system.
The NSS / NPB is more serious as it revokes buying or selling privileges (after
3 strikes). My proposal is this be clarified so new users understand the seriousness
of what they are asking for, instead of just leaving bad feedback (which most
good sellers take quite seriously). Ask the questions about communication and
whether the seller tried to rectify the situation (as you noted).
The NSS / NPB system should also identify how many times the buyer (or seller)
has initiated this process. Is there any notation for someone using this for
every order. I don’t know what protections from abuse this system has. Clarification
is always a good thing.
I believe both feedback systems are a very strong asset of Bricklink. I have
more confidence in the listings here than I do on any other marketplace site.
Canada, Ontario
