mam98031 • Volunteer Community Member • Buyer/Seller since 1999
@monster-deals wrote:You are not likely going to be able to find a site out there that allows for the public shaming of its customers.
...about that.
What?
@monster-deals wrote:
@mam98031 wrote:
@monster-deals wrote:You are not likely going to be able to find a site out there that allows for the public shaming of its customers.
...about that.
What?
Well, ebay for one.
They didn't go out of business.
Sorry, that doesn't make any sense to me. The discussion was about sellers being able to leave negative FB. Ebay hasn't allowed that for over 12 years. So NO Ebay does not allow for the public shamming of buyers as I stated above.
I realize that many feel that the "customers" of Ebay are sellers but that is looking at things in a very limited way. Ebay has to service both buyers and sellers. One is not going to exist without the other. We literally pay Ebay fees and the such, but in those fees we are paying Ebay to make sure they bring in buyers so we all can survive and sell stuff. So Ebay has to be able to service BOTH.
But then I'm confident you knew exactly what I was saying by my comment above. Sellers should not EVER publicly shame their customers. Just BAD business to be sure.
@monster-deals wrote:
@mam98031 wrote:
Just BAD business to be sure.Bad business for who?
You are being so obtuse.
Sellers. When there are less buyers willing to purchase it is bad for both sellers and Ebay. You don't have to be an economist to figure that out. Human nature should tell you that.
If a buyer goes in and looks at a seller's FB, is a little unsure of what they are seeing, then looks at their FB left for others and sees a trend of the seller leaving negs for their buyers. Even a buyer that has no desire or history of misbehaving on Ebay is going to be reluctant to buy from that seller. I sure know I would.
How a seller views a transaction can be totally different from how a buyer views a transaction. When sellers are free to leave negative FB, it could be for any reason they choose, just like what buyers can do right now. But with sellers it has far more impact to how the site will work for both buyers and sellers.
We can argue this point forever I would guess and never see eye to eye on this. This is not something Ebay should ever allow again and I support that completely.
If it were a harmless policy then other sites would be allowing this. Which they do not. Nor should they.
@monster-deals wrote:
@mam98031 wrote:
If it were a harmless policy then other sites would be allowing this. Which they do not. Nor should they.
...about that, they do.
There's an awful lot of internet out there, spend some time on twitter today. You'll see public shaming of a bad user. I doubt they go out of business.
I am 100% for allowing bad feedback for bad customers and would leave it happily and without reservation because by doing so they have a lesser chance to impact another fellow seller.
I am not for malicious or retaliatory feedback, I am for an even handed playfield
Side note: Ebay sellers bring their own customers in by what they source for sale, not the other way around.
Again you are being obtuse.
Twitter is just not even close to what Ebay is. But just in case there is some confusion here, Twitter is a Social media site, not a Marketplace.
Who is the judge of what you state not to be malicious or retaliatory? The seller, the marketplace?
You want the transactions here treated as if they were personal transactions. They are not. Not any of them. They are all business transactions and should be treated as such. Which just brings us back to what I've already said.
This conversation isn't going to change your mind nor mine. We are only going in circles and clearly since you want to bring social media into the conversation we can get no where. I will let you have the last word on the subject.
@mts_auctions wrote:After 20+ years of selling on Ebay, I'm done, I am not big, but I am consistent. When all the seller restrictions started 10+ years ago I grumbled but kept on. How many remember when sellers could leave a negative feedback for a dead beat buyer? That was the point I was on the fence with Ebay, when they took that away, then 10% fee, now they hold my money for 5 days, expect me to ship in 24 hours and pay the fees. Nope not gonna happen.
Then they want my bank account info. Not gonna happen. Ebay has had more security breaches than any company I have seen before, notice all the bogus postings then mysteriously disappear?, and then they want my bank info. wow.
It has been mostly Ok, until now, now is the time to move onto other venues that still want sellers.
Ebay has NEVER had a site security breach that resulted in seller's financial info being compromised.
@kennys-kollectibles wrote:I just wish someone that is against feedback against buyers,
would actually come up with a solution for transparancy concerning
buyers that are scammers and deadbeats.
If no feedback, then why is the buyer scammer situation not being dealt with?
Come on you creative people, find a solution for that problem.
Let me hear it. I am tired of getting ripped off returns and other nonsense.
If the aim is to be fair for buyers, why can't it be fair for sellers as well?
The lopsided playing field that is feedback is only a symptom of the real problem.
I personally think we should do away with buyer feedback altogether. Many sites have gone that direction and I like it myself. Buyer FB serves no purpose.
@downunder-61 wrote:
@lovett-1000 wrote:Just another reason I am gone as of 11/7/2020 at midnight P.S.T. No more selling for me on here. Lots of hard work for 7 years going down the tubes.
Very glad to see you are still here. It is always interesting to visit older threads and see those who have managed to push through, despite the original difficulty they assumed they would be facing
It is interesting to go back and look at this. Lots of sellers that said they would leave never did or they did for awhile and came back. Some of the most vocal people from last year are still selling today and they are in MP.
