mam98031 • Volunteer Community Member • Buyer/Seller since 1999
@hillbillymedia wrote:While I agree that the ability to leave buyers negs is probably not a good idea.....ebay has leaned so far to the other side, buyers don`t seem to be held accountable for anything now.
The answer is always somewhere in the middle. There was a time I trusted mother ebay to do the right thing.
Does anyone here know what it takes for a buyer to lose their privileges here? Is there even such a thing anymore? If there is such a thing.....does ebay stop the buyer from starting up a new account? Does reporting a buyer do anything more than make the seller feel they have accomplished something? These questions are rhetorical of course.
I agree. Speaking from my own personal experience. Other sites that have moved to NO buyer FB at all is much better. Now granted if you are a seller that prefers to receive FB, that could be an issue. Because what I experience on other sites is that since the buyer can't get FB, buyers don't leave FB very often. For me, I'm fine with that.
Ebay often likes to state they make one change or another because it is an industry standard. I wish they would follow the No buyer FB direction too.
No, not manipulated. It was a huge problem. I posted to the Ebay boards back then and the buyer boards were filled every day with buyers who got negged because they did something horrendous, like ask their seller where their item was after a month or complained when their seller sent them trash.
No big deal. We just don't agree on this point. I take no issue with that. What you describe is NOT retaliatory FB that was being discussed but just a complete misuse of the FB system. Was it a problem YES as was retaliatory FB. Was it why Ebay made the change, not in my opinion.
Also without knowing how the buyer spoke to the seller regarding the "trash" they sold, I offer no comment other than to say there isn't enough info on that transaction.
Like me. That's how I got the only neg I ever received as buyer or seller. I stopped leaving negs because I was also threatened by several sellers including one who sold English china as vintage and it arrived with HomeGoods stickers. That was after they accused ME of putting the stickers on or switching the items. As if.
Buyers gave negs quite freely back then. Odd since sellers could leave them too. As to the particulars that would cause you to leave a neg back then IDK since we have no particulars on each situation here.
BTW the mutual withdrawal wasn't implemented until long after this was already a problem and it made it hugely worse. That's how sellers lost the privilege of leaving negs.
I didn't say anything about this option.
Rewriting history is saying it wasn't as bad as it was. Also, good buyers who cared about their reputation were the ones most likely to get hurt and leave. The bad buyers just sniped or got a new id. Most negatives were pointless except to hurt good customers. I completely understand giving how it was, why Ebay made the change.
I don't believe anyone here is trying to "rewrite history". As in may subjects, your view point may not be the same as another posters view point. Because one may not agree with you does not mean they are trying to "rewrite history", is simply means that we have different opinions.
I was not and am not trying to dismiss the FACT that there was retaliatory FB back then. That would be silly because it is a known fact that there was. So I never said this in my other post. I did say that it wasn't the reason Ebay made the change, as that is what I believe. And it was a very GOOD move by Ebay.
So whether Ebay made the change for the reasons you describe or I describe or a combination of all of the above. It doesn't matter. This is subject that is over a DECADE old and has no bearing on today's site.
I support Ebay moving again in the direction of industry standards and stop allowing FB for buyers all together. That is what other sites have done and I think it is working better that way.
For buyers here it may take some time to get use to, but they would come to realize there is no value to receiving FB since sellers have strict rules in which they must follow or get in trouble. Buyer FB only has value to Buyers for personal reasons, whatever they may be. My opinion the site would be healthier for it.
@the*dog*ate*my*tablecloth wrote:This is a group conversation and that was not a post directed specifically to you. It was a continuation of an ongoing discussion. If I could add a post to the end that referred to the conversation as a whole I would do so. However that is not an option so I have to choose a post to hang mine off of.
Everyone can be assured if I ever have a problem with your post individually I will both address you AND quote the part of the post I differ with. Otherwise I will continue to treat this is a group discussion and comment on what different people have said.
As are all threads, but you replied to a post of mine. So unless you state otherwise, I'm not sure why it isn't reasonable for me to take that you are responding to me.
