If you are speaking of your feedback positive percentage it has been there for quite a few months now.
I'm not sure I agree with you - I think it is a positve thing. Many buyers (especially newbies) are guilty of making purchases without checking the sellers feedback and then complaing later if something goes wrong with their transaction with a seller that has 80% positive feedback. At least now it is a little more visible without the need to actually go and check the feedback scorecard of a seller.
Bill treasure-pot
I'm not sure I agree with you - I think it is a positve thing. Many buyers (especially newbies) are guilty of making purchases without checking the sellers feedback and then complaing later if something goes wrong with their transaction with a seller that has 80% positive feedback. At least now it is a little more visible without the need to actually go and check the feedback scorecard of a seller.
Bill treasure-pot
Sorry Tim... I don't agree.
It seems ridiculous that we all complain loudly when eBay involves itself in our businesses (as was the outcry when they first introduced eBay Check Out or the Paypal Not as described policy) but that we also all complain loudly when they take a more "hands-off" approach.
We are both aware of their initiatives to get exhorbitant S/H charges under control. When do buyers and sellers begin to take responsibility for their own actions.
If a seller quotes $50 for S/H when you know it will be less than ten - why do buyers bid and then complain afterwards.
Everyone says that the feedback system is broken and needs an overhaul but few have any concrete ideas as to how it should be changed. Feedback 2.0 may address some of the problems but may well increase others.
The feedback system as it is today has drawbacks - the main one being that too few people pay any attention to a sellers feedback if they see a great deal that they think they must have. I talked to a gentleman in Kitchener today that tells me he bid on and won a plasma from somebody in Michigan over a month ago. He still has not received it. I asked him questions and got the following answers.
1)He paid by bank draft and not by Paypal or credit card because the seller said he can't afford Paypal charges.
2)The seller sold four plasma screens in one day but has not listed any since nor does he have any other listings.
3)The seller had no prior history of selling plasmas.
Had this buyer even bothered to check the seller's feedback he should have heard enough sirens to stay away. Had he even bothered to see that the sellers was selling four plasmas in that day but had none listed for the future and had sold none in the past it would have raised enough question to look elsewhere.
So who is at fault - the crook for taking the money and running or the rube for being taken so easily?
Bill treasure-pot
It seems ridiculous that we all complain loudly when eBay involves itself in our businesses (as was the outcry when they first introduced eBay Check Out or the Paypal Not as described policy) but that we also all complain loudly when they take a more "hands-off" approach.
We are both aware of their initiatives to get exhorbitant S/H charges under control. When do buyers and sellers begin to take responsibility for their own actions.
If a seller quotes $50 for S/H when you know it will be less than ten - why do buyers bid and then complain afterwards.
Everyone says that the feedback system is broken and needs an overhaul but few have any concrete ideas as to how it should be changed. Feedback 2.0 may address some of the problems but may well increase others.
The feedback system as it is today has drawbacks - the main one being that too few people pay any attention to a sellers feedback if they see a great deal that they think they must have. I talked to a gentleman in Kitchener today that tells me he bid on and won a plasma from somebody in Michigan over a month ago. He still has not received it. I asked him questions and got the following answers.
1)He paid by bank draft and not by Paypal or credit card because the seller said he can't afford Paypal charges.
2)The seller sold four plasma screens in one day but has not listed any since nor does he have any other listings.
3)The seller had no prior history of selling plasmas.
Had this buyer even bothered to check the seller's feedback he should have heard enough sirens to stay away. Had he even bothered to see that the sellers was selling four plasmas in that day but had none listed for the future and had sold none in the past it would have raised enough question to look elsewhere.
So who is at fault - the crook for taking the money and running or the rube for being taken so easily?
Bill treasure-pot
