@castlemagicmemories wrote:
@v7bbn_0 wrote:
@castlemagicmemories wrote:
@castlemagicmemories wrote:
@rainbowcolorz wrote:
@ersatz_sobriquet wrote:
What I find interesting is that a couple regular "ebay is always right" posters never show up on threads like this, wonder why that is?
What about those couple regular "eBay is always wrong" posters who show up on the threads that are about the great things that eBay does for buyers and sellers alike. Wonder why that is?
A great point there. There is nothing to chastise honest sellers about, just links of threads by other sellers who bought and got true SNADs and poor customer service, and other similiar posts about those types of experiences that drive good buyers away from good sellers~and hopefully that raises awareness that sellers aren't the only ones with problems, and makes for better experiences for both buyers and sellers.
Ran out of edit time.
The Buyer's Board has reflected that buyers become irate when their honest negs are removed when they do not violate any feedback policies and some say they won't shop here anymore as they can't trust feedback, just as some have posted that the every buyer is a scammer thoughts seen on Selling has driven away some buyers. I spend time on the Buyer's Board defending sellers who buyers erroneously think are scammers~that word, scammer, is overused on both the Selling and the Buying Board.
It is very true, the situation I just described is one MAYOR focal point why we no longer spend near the amount of money we used to spend on ebay. It's not the only reason, it is hardly the only one but it is one of them and we used to spend near 20 thousand dollars a year on ebay, today that number has dwindled considerably.
I will say this...
In a lot of cases where FB is removed the process is in fact automatic, very few if any phone calls are involved but I do agree it reeks of sellers gaming the system all the same. And most important is it erodes buyer confidence to a level that may be hard to envision unless personally experienced.
I agree. When a buyer save negs for truly egregious behavior, and it is an honest neg, and then that neg is removed, it does make for indignation, and a loss of buyer trust and confidence.
The feedback system definitely needs some tweaking if it's going to work at all.
Honest negs should not be removed, but at least from our perspective as a seller, there's not many honest neg's. I'm not quite sure how sellers can even get honest ones removed, since you usually need a pretty convincing reason to get them removed.
There's also "gray areas". For example, if we have a problem with USPS and they damage the package during shipment, and then work hard to assist the customer, gladly replace his products for free, etc. Then at the end they leave the negative, it seems to be a bit of a gray area when discussing with eBay. Becuase their stance is usually "Make the customer happy". By the end of it, we may have made the customer happy, but then he does a negative? Should that be allowed? It's a hard question to answer.
There's also some sellers who literally have nothing but negative feedback. Ironically, these type of sellers are usually pretty vague and use the same complaint in every feedback... these are some of the HARDEST ones to get removed. It doesn't make much sense.
I completely agree that honest negatives should not be removed, or at least be very hard to remove. On the other hand, it makes no sense that obvious abuse of the system is allowed.
They probably need to rephrase feedback scores, or be a bit more clear of what the feedback is intended for, if it is to work better.
I don't know how this applies to this topic. We've never had them removed as easy as the topic says here, and the revision number always changes.
For both buyer AND seller issues... eBay is not hard enough on abuse of their systems. But it's scary to ask for them to put any more weight in to these issues... because if we go by their recent updates to the Returns systems as an example... if they start throwing out penalties... they need to have a way to remove penalties from people who get falsely accused, and that hasn't been their strong point this year...
As a recent example, Toyota hit us with a VeRO complaint for "not having for/fits in the title/description" on 3 listings that DID have for/fits. We were told the penalties were removed after I reporeted this. Then we got an email saying "Thanks for updating your listings, but any penalties can not be removed".... even though we did NOT change anything on the listings and they were complaint in the first place!
I wish they would put all these changes to their system on hold until they got the issues fixed and things working properly... the software has no polish and is not in good working order. The software developer in me cringes to see so many ways to exploit the system/policies.
