@curraone wrote:
but we must persist - it is the only legitimate avenue - not leaving false positives.
I do agree with this, at least in spirit. 😄 I have always been an advocate of the UPI system, if for no reason other than because it's the only system we have, and does have at least some positive effects for all sellers (with blocks in place) when it functions as it should.
At the same time, I'm becoming increasingly frustrated by the failings of the system. The areas where it fails aren't just minor, they are in fact integral to its primary function or purpose, and completely undermine the control sellers are suppose to have. That makes it a token gesture from eBay, in my eyes, not a genuine committment to minimising the effects (anything from cost to inconvenience) of serial pests.
I'm not an advocate for negs for buyers, though, in part because I know from other sites that the vast majority of site members do not make themselves aware of the systems that are in place, and/or take preventative measures by using that system until it's already too late - isolated comments on an individual profile, while I do recognise that there are circumstances in which they have aided a seller and prevented a transaction, can only influence people who have the opportunity to see them, which is not many in the grand scheme of things.
I like the strike system in theory, I just wish it was expanded and implemented properly.
