Current Feedback System Is Useless To Sellers

[elvisnut72]

The system to leave feedback for buyers is flawed. You can only leave positive. I've has a big problem with non payers. So a case is opened, some eventually pay some don't. Your only choice as a seller is leave no feedback  or leave a positive rating with negative comments but of course then you open yourself up to retaliatory feedback from the buyer. It's a catch 22 system. So the buyer's rating continues to look flawless to other sellers and there is no way to make them aware that their potential buyer may or may not pay. I believe as soon as a case is opened you should be allowed to leave neutral and if the buyer never pays then the negative rating become available to use. These options of course are activated by Ebay step by step of the process. Unless the buyer makes contact with a reason for delay of payment or non payment. To many buyers are taking advantage of the current rules that are in place for making timely payments. When I decide to bid on an item I do it with the intention to buy it not play games with the seller and my fellow bidders. If a buyer is allowed to leave negative to make the community aware of a bad seller then it should work the same way from a seller to a buyer. I know currently Ebay keeps track of these people etc. but that doesn't help make the community itself aware. I do not post this to bash buyers as 95% of my time on Ebay is spent buying not selling but the scales should be balanced as far as feedback is concered.

[chrysylys]

You realize it's been 10 years, right?

And that FB doesn't really mean anything?

And that the type of retailatory, shaming FB you propose is WHY it was changed?

[chrysylys]

---

@elvisnut72 wrote:

Your only choice as a seller is leave no feedback  or leave a positive rating with negative comments but of course then you open yourself up to ...

---

... sanctions on your selling account.

[virtualwhimsy]

Is it that time of the month or something I swear this is like the third rant

That is offensive and ignorant.

[elvisnut72]

It's not shaming feedback..pay for what you bid on. It's that simple.

[missjen831]

So you want buyers to follow the rules but you don’t follow the rules yourself? Alright then.

you are asking for much worse trouble here, you are buying and selling on the same account. You are asking for retaliation from the sellers you have left unpleasant feedback for.

[elvisnut72]

Yes that it you got me all figured out. This was a waste of time. Nope I NEVER follow the rules. Just like I ALWAYS win auctions and never pay. The jig is up! I buy and sell from the same account because as I stated 95% of the time I am the buyer and I pay! It's a waste to open a new account to sell as rarely as I do. I am only asking that people pay for what they win as it should be. Talk about getting slammed for no reason. Really?

[thatsallfolks]

---

@elvisnut72wrote:
It's not shaming feedback..pay for what you bid on. It's that simple.

---

It's a policy violation. It's been a policy violation for ten years. Slammed for no reason? LOL. Learn the rules; you're a decade behind.

[mudshark61369]

@chrysylys,

"And that the type of retailatory, shaming FB you propose is WHY it was changed''.

Leaving a non postive feedback for a nonpayer is in no way retalitory.  Leaving an undeserved nonpositive because a trading partner left one is retaliatory.  eBay's reasoning for no buyer negs was just a cover story. If they really were concerned about retaliatory feedback, why did it take them two more years to create a feedback extortion policy?   

[7606dennis]

Actually, even in today's eBay world I find feedback useful.  I can tell if a bidder is likely to be nitpicky and if they prone to bid retraction.

[mudshark61369]

@elvisnut72,

You can avoid many non payers by setting your buyer requirements to automatically block Buyers who: Have received 2 unpaid Item strikes in 12 months.

https://pages.ebay.com/help/sell/manage_bidders_ov.html

You can also set up the Unpaid Item Assistant to automatically to open disputes for you in as little a 48 hours after an auction ends and close it 4 days later if the buyer doesn't pay. That gives them a strike.

https://pages.ebay.com/help/sell/unpaid-item-assistant.html

Leaving nonpositive feedback for nonpayers didn't help if that member sniped an auction or used buy it now. Filing disputes and setting the buyer requirement, does a much better job of protecting you from nonpayers than being able to leave them feedback ever did.

[missjen831]

---

@mudshark61369wrote:

@chrysylys,

"And that the type of retailatory, shaming FB you propose is WHY it was changed''.

Leaving a non postive feedback for a nonpayer is in no way retalitory.  Leaving an undeserved nonpositive because a trading partner left one is retaliatory.  eBay's reasoning for no buyer negs was just a cover story. If they really were concerned about retaliatory feedback, why did it take them two more years to create a feedback extortion policy?   

---

Um.....leaving non-positive feedback IS retaliation for not paying. That’s a fact not an opinion. 

[littleguineapiggy]

Yes and no.  Ebay sees it as: there's no need for you to post negative feedback for someone that doesn't pay when we've given you so many tools to weed them out like NP strike settings, buy it now, etc.  Then when it comes to buyers that like to nitpick and leave negs for everyone because they may be unreasonable or want to discount fish, all you have to do is look at the feedback they leave for others.  I've used this to win a case or two.

[virtualwhimsy]

Um.....leaving non-positive feedback IS retaliation for not paying. That’s a fact not an opinion. 

You're being semantical.  What he was stating was that "back in the day" sellers who left retalitory feedback (meaning - they negged the buyer for no other reason but the buyer negged them) - is "retalitory" feedback.

Wanting to leave a non paying buyer a neg would in no way be "retalitory".

[meoxcross]

"Feedback Wars" is why feedback has become limited in the first place. "Feedback Wars" is no different from a flamewar designed to ruin a buyers shopping experience which is why it is never coming back.