Ebay's Feedback System

[pandoras_prints]

Do you think Ebay will ever restore the feedback system to how it use to be 'FAIR'. ?

Sellers not be allowed to leave a negative feedback for a buyer is as every seller know's completely unfair.

Both buyers and sellers should have the same rights, to leave feedback on their transaction. If a seller has had a bad experience with a non- paying buyer or one of 1000 others reason's why can't this be reflected on the buyers feedback?

If I could see that a buyer has many neg's I would block them from my store.

Shouldn't a seller have that option?

[freightcar2009]

I am a buyer only and believe there should be a star system for things like communication, speed of payment and honesty however dishonest sellers would abuse it. 

There are a lot of very good and honest sellers on eBay the same as there are a lot of honest buyers but it only takes a couple to make it a bad experiance for someone.

The system in place now is nowhere near perfect however its as fair as you will get under the circumstances.

The only way to get something a lot fairer would be to employ an independent umpire to evaluate every sale.... If you think the fees are too high now this would cost a fortune.

[phorum_junkie*]

However, as a seller I would really like to be able to access some sort of history of a buyer BUT ONLY ONCE THEY HAVE PURCHASED..

Tonal there is a very good reason why that would not work. Sometimes a buyer will find out after they have purchased that there is some reason they should not or cannot pay. If they do not know how to appeal a strike and get it removed it will stay there and then you would be wrongly influenced into thinking they were dodgy. What difference would it make anyway? They still either pay or they don't and you can do nothing you wouldn't do if you did not have the information.

[rabbitearbandicoot]

Since when is the buyers obligation completed just because they have paid?

What other obligation does a buyer have? If you buy something in a shop your ONLY obligation is to pay for the item. Well, I suppose if you want to be pedantic, you also have an obligation not to wreck the shop on the way out.

How is that different to a buyer on eBay. You are saying that the buyer must be kind and considerate and leave me nice feedback or I'm not going to leave him any?

I know that feedback is volutary and that there is no real OBLIGATION for either party to leave it, but, when all is said and done, the whole theory behind feedback is to let other users know the reputation of  members / potential trading partners.

I am all in favour of buyers and sellers being able to leave bad feedback if the situation warrants it, but, to WITHHOLD good feedback from a good buyer just because he hasn't left you the seller good feedback, is BLACKMAIL & WRONG!

[thesoulyearns]

this business of a seller only leaving positive feedback AFTER the buyer has left positve for the seller IS A CROCK!!!

When the payment is made, the buyer has fulfilled his part of the bargain and the seller should leave feedback to reflect that.

...

It's about both parties doing what they're supposed to do and agreed to do. The buyer paying in reasonable time and the seller giving them what they bought in the listing. Sometimes the product arrives damaged in the post or something else, so it's just cautious by not leaving the buyer feedback because you don't know how the item has travelled until they leave their feedback.

eBay does handle disputes so I guess sellers should be more confident about leaving positive feedback right away.

[davewil1964]

I think it may have been mentioned already, but feedback is voluntary. That means neither the buyer nor the seller has to leave it.So there is no should on either part.

Those sellers who automatically leave feedback for buyers after the buyers leave it are doing so with eBay's blessing. As eBay provide this system, I suspect they don't have a problem with it.

And buyer feedback is irrelevant.

[digital*ghost]

What other obligation does a buyer have? If you buy something in a shop your ONLY obligation is to pay for the item.

As a seller, then, my only obligation is to post the item. Once I've done that, the buyer should leave me feedback immediately - who cares if they haven't actually received it or anything, it's not like there are a bunch of different things that could go wrong and be handled by me in an incompetent, ineffective or just downright rude manner.

Feedback isn't about obligations, it's not a part of a transaction, it's an assessment of one. If a seller doesn't want to assess the entire transaction until they have more knowledge of it, that is their perogative and the word "should" doesn't belong in a sentence about feedback, unless that sentence is "every member should work out the system that suits them". Just because you have worked out your way, doesn't mean you can turn that into an expectation of others.

[phorum_junkie*]

It's about both parties doing what they're supposed to do and agreed to do.

Exactly, both parties agreed to abide by ebay policy which is that feedback is voluntary.

There is no obligation on the part of anyone to leave feedback and any feedback that is left must comply with ebay policy.

End of.

[rabbitearbandicoot]

As a seller, then, my only obligation is to post the item. Once I've done that, the buyer should leave me feedback immediately - who cares if they haven't actually received it or anything, it's not like there are a bunch of different things that could go wrong and be handled by me in an incompetent, ineffective or just downright rude manner.

No! That is not what I am saying. As in the shop scenario, once the item has reached the buyers hands and he has checked that it is what he ordered - THEN he leaves feedback.

If something goes wrong in the transaction ie you sent the wrong item - of course it's STILL YOUR obligation.

If you sent the right thing and AP broke it then the obligation is for one of you to fill in a lost item claim - probably best for that to be you - BUT it's STILL not time for the buyer to leave feedback, unless you want a NEG of course which would be a little unfair.

If  feedback is NOT given by buyers until / unless the buyer leaves a positive for the seller - it is quite feasible for an excellent buyer, who has diligently purchased MANY items over a number of years - to still have zero feedback. If that buyer then tries to buy an item which a seller has defined as 'no zero feedback bids accepted' - BOTH the seller and the buyer LOSE OUT on what could have been a straight forward transaction on the parts of both members.

As a few have said, it's eBay's site - they introduced the theory of feedback and it being a guide to a member's selling / buying reputation - eBay made feedback voluntary - if people are not going to use it as it should be then why not delete it altogether?

[rabbitearbandicoot]

"If  feedback is NOT given by buyers until" - that should be 'sellers' of course.

[rabbitearbandicoot]

I think it may have been mentioned already, but feedback is voluntary. That means neither the buyer nor the seller has to leave it.So there is no should on either part.

Those sellers who automatically leave feedback for buyers after the buyers leave it are doing so with eBay's blessing. As eBay provide this system, I suspect they don't have a problem with it.

And buyer feedback is irrelevant.

I think the automatic feedback facility was invented to take the load off huge volume sellers who had limited time to leave feedback manually for such large number of buyers.

WHY is buyer feedback irrelevant? Well, it is at the moment where no negatives can be left for bad buyers, but otherwise?