Question:
<snip Meanwhile, I’m now convinced that you either sell or buy (but likely sell) high-value items, have been screwed by newbies once or twice, and haven’t let it go. — Dan Sadro
No, he’s a ~100 feedback buyer who had problems with a ~750 feedback seller, who got most of his feedback selling high end merchandise and who had , the kind of seller whose positive feedback would be considered more valuable under his proposed system. Doesn’t make a lot of sense, does it? The changes he’s proposing would elevate the feedback number of the person he had a problem with. Of course, under his system, since the other seller has higher feedback, and has had a higher percentage of successful transactions, the other seller must be right. Richard Ward
Response:
eBay’s system knows how many auctions I have won regardless if feedback has been awarded.
But it doesn’t know how many auctions have been successful, since merely winning doesn’t mean that you paid, or that the seller sent the item. Again, I am trying to introduce a weighting factor like I described above in the example of NewHeel and GrayBeard.
I understand what you’re trying to do, but I think it’s in the wrong direction. As I said, most of this information is already available for people to look at. I suspect most of them don’t because it’s too complicated. Now you’re putting forth a proposal that would make feedback (already too complicated for some) more complicated as well. I think it’s well-intentioned but counterproductive. Deborah Stevenson
Response:
["marketplace" deleted since this doesn't really fit there] First, I want to repeat that the weighting factor used in the example was the simplest I could come up with on the fly. The concept, however, is to improve the feedback system by addressing a few of its current weaknesses: 1. filter out bogus feedback left by: a. persons with a lack of experience on eBay
And unfortunately therefore cripples all new users as a consequence, because you’ve essentially filtered out *everybody’s* early feedback. Many of the worst scammers are long-term sellers who prey on newbies. This would basically give them carte blanche. b. miscreants that get killed off only to be resurrected under new accounts (transient members with nothing to lose by retaliating against responsible members that properly leave negative feedback or file NPB
This doesn’t do anything to them. 2. encourage members who are currently fearful of leaving negative feedback and filing NPB notices
How does it encourage them? It just means they’ll suffer more for a retaliatory neg from the big guys, who already suffer less from negs than small users. Basically, rather than solving feedback you’re magnifying an extant situation that already has problematic aspects. Secondly, GrayBeard’s past performance would suggest that he has been a straight shooter and that he would not be someone that would likely start cheating in the manner you describe.
Look up the user record of thebarry. The feedback responses from the scammed newbies would testify to any patterns of wrong doing.
As they do now, but now they have a considerably greater impact on people who won’t actually read the feedback because of their effect on the neg total. Basically, I don’t think you’ve realistically assessed the use of the feedback system here, and the result is a cumbersome and bottom-heavy concept. Thirdly, it would not be the only factor used to compute the total number of feedback points.
Phil, if somebody has to do algebra to figure out their own feedback after two sales, the system’s seriously flawed. I can see including the sale price in the current feedback information, but weighting it or anything else into the raw number is a problematic idea. Yes, in the example I gave, the points were solely based on how long the account has been in use, but this was done to keep it simple.
It didn’t work 
. In other words, I would put more faith in the feedback left by a buyer/seller with good experience in trading expensive items since it suggests a higher level of responsibility for fulfilling one’s obligations and, of course, a higher level of risk.
And I’d disagree with that anyway. In other words, I would put more faith in the feedback left by a seasoned buyer/seller than someone that has just begun trading or someone that has a poor record with buyers or sellers.
You speak as if they’re mutually exclusive. They’re not. To preclude dissent by those, like yourself, who want the feedback system to stay the same, eBay could easily add this new functionality as an option for those who desire a more meaningful technique of evaluating potential buyers or sellers.
So basically they’d implement a complicated and expensive change only to have no one use it except for veteran scammers. Sorry, Phil, I’m not seeing this as a good plan. Deborah Stevenson
Response:
That is why I would like to see feedback points weighted by such factors as: 1. by how long the member has participated on eBay as this should filter out those members that change member IDs as often as most people change their undergarments 2. by the number of successful trades (regardless if feedback has been left) since it is a measure of how well a member has participated in auctions
How would you determine "successful" – no negative? That’d skew things more towards the positive side than the present system.. Kris
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I want eBay to add a link that displays only the comments from those buyers/sellers that have left negative ratings. Abour feedback myself I feel too much of a deal is made up of it because I know for a FACT many people do not give negs out at all for fear of one back. I have had four non payers maybe (it has now been over three weeks) and two of them have very little feedback 5 and under. Now if they do not pay and I neg them well it is no big deal to them as they can do another ID,unless they get three FVF . So it is not that great of a system for sure. Bottom line for me is if someone doesn’t pay I file an FVF and then a neg, and await mine… So far 30% of the negs I gave have negged me back. Joe
That is why I would like to see feedback points weighted by such factors as: 1. by how long the member has participated on eBay as this should filter out those members that change member IDs as often as most people change their undergarments 2. by the number of successful trades (regardless if feedback has been left) since it is a measure of how well a member has participated in auctions 3. by the monetary value of the trade (and this value should be preserved permanently rather than being discarded after some period of time as it is now) since larger trades are worthy of greater scrutiny because of the inherent risks 4. by the strength of the buyer/seller’s feedback history as this is another measure of longevity (see #1) In other words, I would put more faith in the feedback left by a seasoned buyer/seller than someone that has just begun trading or someone that already has a poor record with buyers or sellers. This should counter the damage you describe by weeding out the retaliatory negatives left by those punks that do not pay. pdp
Response:
Phil Pucci; – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -While the following scenario is an example of one way this could be constructed, it is not the only way. In fact, I am going to "wing it" so please be patient. Example: "NewHeel," a buyer that has been with eBay for 30 days, wins an auction held by long term seller "GrayBeard" but he does not pay. GrayBeard, as a three year veteran and a responsible trader, does his duty by making sure others are warned of NewHeel’s poor performance by leaving negative feedback and by filing a Non-Paying Bidder notice. "NewHeel," true to form, leaves a negative feedback in retaliation to the negative and the NPB complaint. In the current feedback system, both NewHeel and GrayBeard lose one point. Each are equally penalized yet most of us would deem this to be unfair. In a new system that is adjusted for key factors such as account longevity, the negative left by NewHeel will count just 1/36th (2.7%) of the total points awarded in a given trade against GrayBeard than the amount that GrayBeard’s negative counts against NewHeel. The factor of 1/36 used in this example is a weighting factor calculated by dividing NewHeel’s one month by GrayBeard’s 36 months. If the total points feedback points awarded in a auction is 100, GrayBeard loses 2.7 but NewHeel loses 97.3.
That is a horrifically bad idea. GrayBeard, a 36-month veteran of eBay, decides to start scamming like there’s no tomorrow. His feedback will be barely touched against a new bidder who he scams. He could scam 36 newbies under your proposed system and only get docked as much as 1 person under the current system. Feedback system is best simple, and eBay’s system is about as simple as you can get. — Dan Sadro
Response:
Deborah, Thank you for taking the time to consider my thoughts about how eBay’s feedback system could be expanded to include additional factors that would better represent real world situations described by myself and others in this thread. I responded to you in context as shown below. That is why I would like to see feedback points weighted by such factors as:
I should have stated this more clearly. I meant to say that the feedback should be "weighted" by certain factors so that it provides a better representation of a trader’s profile. While the following scenario is an example of one way this could be constructed, it is not the only way. In fact, I am going to "wing it" so please be patient. Example: "NewHeel," a buyer that has been with eBay for 30 days, wins an auction held by long term seller "GrayBeard" but he does not pay. GrayBeard, as a three year veteran and a responsible trader, does his duty by making sure others are warned of NewHeel’s poor performance by leaving negative feedback and by filing a Non-Paying Bidder notice. "NewHeel," true to form, leaves a negative feedback in retaliation to the negative and the NPB complaint. In the current feedback system, both NewHeel and GrayBeard lose one point. Each are equally penalized yet most of us would deem this to be unfair. In a new system that is adjusted for key factors such as account longevity, the negative left by NewHeel will count just 1/36th (2.7%) of the total points awarded in a given trade against GrayBeard than the amount that GrayBeard’s negative counts against NewHeel. The factor of 1/36 used in this example is a weighting factor calculated by dividing NewHeel’s one month by GrayBeard’s 36 months. If the total points feedback points awarded in a auction is 100, GrayBeard loses 2.7 but NewHeel loses 97.3. 1. by how long the member has participated on eBay as this should filter out those members that change member IDs as often as most people change their undergarments But that information is available already. I’m not quite sure what you mean about changing member IDs, since the date is for the start of eBay membership, not for the start of the use of that ID–are you proposing a second date for the start of that particular ID?
Yes, I meant the start of eBay membership. 2. by the number of successful trades (regardless if feedback has been left) since it is a measure of how well a member has participated in auctions But how is a trade deemed successful outside of the feedback of the parties involved?
eBay’s system knows how many auctions I have won regardless if feedback has been awarded. Inattention, or laziness, on part of certain sellers should not count against me, should it? If I won the auction, eBay collects from the seller. If no NPB is filed, the trade should be considered successful after, let’s say, three months. 4. by the strength of the buyer/seller’s feedback history as this is another measure of longevity (see #1) By "strength" do you mean numbers? That’s currently available as well.
Again, I am trying to introduce a weighting factor like I described above in the example of NewHeel and GrayBeard. It sounds to me like most of the information you’re looking for is either currently available or impracticable. The sales amount is the only specification that isn’t currently connected with one’s feedback records that seems a plausible addition.
Please give this sample scenario another try. The numbers used for "weighting" in example shown above was chosen off the top of my head, and accordingly, may not be the best but I am hoping it demonstrates this concept better than my earlier post. pdp
Response:
Phil Pucci; Firstly, lay down the crack pipe. Please. I’ve been nice thus far, now it’s time for me to get real. 1. filter out bogus feedback left by: a. persons with a lack of experience on eBay
Sorry, dumbass. Just because a person is new to eBay does not mean that feedback left by them is bogus. You were new to eBay once, remember? b. miscreants that get killed off only to be resurrected under new accounts (transient members with nothing to lose by retaliating against responsible members that properly leave negative feedback or file NPB
Yeah, some people are ‘miscreants.’ It’s called ‘reality’ and I think you need to ’step’ into it very ’soon.’ For your sake. 2. encourage members who are currently fearful of leaving negative feedback and filing NPB notices
People who are currently fearful of leaving negative feedback and filing NPBs deserve to get screwed by these ‘miscreants.’ I have no respect for those who fail to tell the truth in a case where the truth helps others. Secondly, GrayBeard’s past performance would suggest that he has been a straight shooter and that he would not be someone that would likely start cheating in the manner you describe. The feedback responses from the scammed newbies would testify to any patterns of wrong doing. Remember, the new feedback system would allow you to see just the negatives without all of the bother I described in the original posting in this thread.
Of course, because GrayBeard has been an upstanding eBay citizen for three years, he couldn’t scam anyone, and it’s clearly the other person’s fault. Just like because I’ve been an excellent driver since I was licenced, all accidents I’m involved in are clearly not my fault. Thirdly, it would not be the only factor used to compute the total number of feedback points. Yes, in the example I gave, the points were solely based on how long the account has been in use, but this was done to keep it simple. It is my intention that the multiple factors cited in my earlier posting would yield a composite value such as:
SIMPLE? You call your system simple? Please pass whatever you’re smoking to me, maybe I’ll understand it then. 1. the monetary value of the trade In other words, I would put more faith in the feedback left by a buyer/seller with good experience in trading expensive items since it suggests a higher level of responsibility for fulfilling one’s obligations and, of course, a higher level of risk.
Funny… I would put a lot more faith in 100 feedback from $1 items than 1 feedback from a $100 item. 2. the strength of the buyer/seller’s feedback history (this is not the same as the age of one’s account)
That is an aspect that is completely opinionated. There are so many factors in the strength of feedback history, and for each and every person, they are different. 3. the number of successful trades (regardless if feedback has been left).
So, a successful trade is a trade where the buyer is the top bidder, but hasn’t received negative feedback yet? In other words, I would put more faith in the feedback left by a seasoned buyer/seller than someone that has just begun trading or someone that has a poor record with buyers or sellers.
Because newbies don’t count, right? To preclude dissent by those, like yourself, who want the feedback system to stay the same, eBay could easily add this new functionality as an option for those who desire a more meaningful technique of evaluating potential buyers or sellers. By simultaneously maintaining the current feedback system, users may continue to evaluate buyers and sellers in the same manner they do today. In short, this proposed feedback option is not mutually exclusive. In addition, it does not require any additional operations by buyers or sellers since the composite weighting factors is the result of an automatic calculation based on known values.
Can the lawyer-speak shit. You have certain criteria for what makes a good buyer/seller, and many of the criteria I completely disagree with. I don’t feel that newbies are automatically worse eBayers because they’re new, and I also don’t feel that transactions involving larger amounts of money are more worthwhile than transactions involving smaller amounts of money. Some people aren’t comfortable spending a week’s salary on eBay, and you want to penalise them. Meanwhile, I’m now convinced that you either sell or buy (but likely sell) high-value items, have been screwed by newbies once or twice, and haven’t let it go. — Dan Sadro
Response:
Example: "NewHeel," a buyer that has been with eBay for 30 days, wins an auction held by long term seller "GrayBeard" but he does not pay. GrayBeard, as a three year veteran and a responsible trader, does his duty by making sure others are warned of NewHeel’s poor performance by leaving negative feedback and by filing a Non-Paying Bidder notice. "NewHeel," true to form, leaves a negative feedback in retaliation to the negative and the NPB complaint. In the current feedback system, both NewHeel and GrayBeard lose one point. Each are equally penalized yet most of us would deem this to be unfair.
Phil’s example is worse than his original suggestion about weighting feedback; mostly because of a false statement in his scenario: "Each are equally penalized.." Graybeard’s negative has NO (or an infinitesimal) effect on him, while a negative against NewHeel’s record is inversely proportional to his total feedback to date.
Response:
Kris, Thank you for taking the time to consider my thoughts about how eBay’s feedback system could be expanded to include additional factors that would better represent real world situations described by myself and others in this thread. I realize that all of this discussion is most probably a waste of time but I am encouraged by the responses I have received in this thread and by private email. At the very least it is a source of cheap psychotherapy <grin! – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – That is why I would like to see feedback points weighted by such factors as: 1. by how long the member has participated on eBay as this should filter out those members that change member IDs as often as most people change their undergarments 2. by the number of successful trades (regardless if feedback has been left) since it is a measure of how well a member has participated in auctions How would you determine "successful" – no negative? That’d skew things more towards the positive side than the present system..
eBay’s system knows how many auctions I have won regardless if feedback has been awarded. Inattention, or laziness, on part of certain sellers should not count against me, should it? If I won the auction, eBay collects from the seller. If no NPB is filed, the trade should be considered successful after, let’s say, three months. I left a lengthier response to Deborah in this same thread and it includes an example to better illustrate the concept of weighting feedback according to other aspects of member performance. pdp
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I want eBay to add a link that displays only the comments from those buyers/sellers that have left negative ratings. Abour feedback myself I feel too much of a deal is made up of it because I know for a FACT many people do not give negs out at all for fear of one back. I have had four non payers maybe (it has now been over three weeks) and two of them have very little feedback 5 and under. Now if they do not pay and I neg them well it is no big deal to them as they can do another ID,unless they get three FVF . So it is not that great of a system for sure. Bottom line for me is if someone doesn’t pay I file an FVF and then a
neg, and await mine… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – So far 30% of the negs I gave have negged me back. Joe That is why I would like to see feedback points weighted by such factors as: 1. by how long the member has participated on eBay as this should filter out those members that change member IDs as often as most people change their undergarments 2. by the number of successful trades (regardless if feedback has been left) since it is a measure of how well a member has participated in auctions 3. by the monetary value of the trade (and this value should be preserved permanently rather than being discarded after some period of time as it is now) since larger trades are worthy of greater scrutiny because of the inherent risks 4. by the strength of the buyer/seller’s feedback history as this is another measure of longevity (see #1) In other words, I would put more faith in the feedback left by a seasoned buyer/seller than someone that has just begun trading or someone that already has a poor record with buyers or sellers. This should counter the damage you describe by weeding out the retaliatory negatives left by those punks that do not pay. pdp All good points, and in my experience on eBay,my buyers that buy over the 100 range I have not had a problem with at all. This makes up about 60% of my sales. The other ones well 70% are newbies(under 10 feedbacks) or have bought something like a $1.00 item. The others some have had a feedback as high as 200 and I was their fist neg,as they were very intimidating types,who could coerce less confrontational sellers not to neg them. I wrote to some of the sellers of these people and they told me wither they did not know how to file a FVF or they were afraid and just wanted to forget the whole thing. In fact I spoke to 4 eBay friends this afternoon, and ALL will not leave a neg, let alone file a FVF! Of course these four are the type that would never speak up if there was a disservice done. Some people. Joe
Thank you for taking the time to consider my thoughts about how eBay’s feedback system could be expanded to include additional factors that would better represent real world situations described by yourself and others in this thread. I am copying a snippet of my response to Deborah on this same thread since it addresses the issues you cite above. Again, this is just one example of how this could be done. "NewHeel," a buyer that has been with eBay for 30 days, wins an auction held by long term seller "GrayBeard" but he does not pay. GrayBeard, as a three year veteran and a responsible trader, does his duty by making sure others are warned of NewHeel’s poor performance by leaving negative feedback and by filing a Non-Paying Bidder notice. "NewHeel," true to form, leaves a negative feedback in retaliation to the negative and the NPB complaint. In the current feedback system, both NewHeel and GrayBeard lose one point. Each are equally penalized yet most of us would deem this to be unfair. In a new system that is adjusted for key factors such as account longevity, the negative left by NewHeel will count just 1/36th (2.7%) of the total points awarded in a given trade against GrayBeard than the amount that GrayBeard’s negative counts against NewHeel. The factor of 1/36 used in this example is a weighting factor calculated by dividing NewHeel’s one month by GrayBeard’s 36 months. If the total points feedback points awarded in a auction is 100, GrayBeard loses 2.7 but NewHeel loses 97.3. pdp
Response:
That is why I would like to see feedback points weighted by such factors as: 1. by how long the member has participated on eBay as this should filter out those members that change member IDs as often as most people change their undergarments
But that information is available already. I’m not quite sure what you mean about changing member IDs, since the date is for the start of eBay membership, not for the start of the use of that ID–are you proposing a second date for the start of that particular ID? 2. by the number of successful trades (regardless if feedback has been left) since it is a measure of how well a member has participated in auctions
But how is a trade deemed successful outside of the feedback of the parties involved? 4. by the strength of the buyer/seller’s feedback history as this is another measure of longevity (see #1)
By "strength" do you mean numbers? That’s currently available as well. It sounds to me like most of the information you’re looking for is either currently available or impracticable. The sales amount is the only specification that isn’t currently connected with one’s feedback records that seems a plausible addition. Deborah Stevenson
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I want eBay to add a link that displays only the comments from those buyers/sellers that have left negative ratings. Abour feedback myself I feel too much of a deal is made up of it because I know for a FACT many people do not give negs out at all for fear of one back. I have had four non payers maybe (it has now been over three weeks) and two of them have very little feedback 5 and under. Now if they do not pay and I neg them well it is no big deal to them as they can do another ID,unless they get three FVF . So it is not that great of a system for sure. Bottom line for me is if someone doesn’t pay I file an FVF and then a neg, and await mine… So far 30% of the negs I gave have negged me back. Joe That is why I would like to see feedback points weighted by such factors as: 1. by how long the member has participated on eBay as this should filter out those members that change member IDs as often as most people change their undergarments 2. by the number of successful trades (regardless if feedback has been left) since it is a measure of how well a member has participated in auctions 3. by the monetary value of the trade (and this value should be preserved permanently rather than being discarded after some period of time as it is now) since larger trades are worthy of greater scrutiny because of the inherent risks 4. by the strength of the buyer/seller’s feedback history as this is another measure of longevity (see #1) In other words, I would put more faith in the feedback left by a seasoned buyer/seller than someone that has just begun trading or someone that already has a poor record with buyers or sellers. This should counter the damage you describe by weeding out the retaliatory negatives left by those punks that do not pay. pdp
All good points, and in my experience on eBay,my buyers that buy over the 100 range I have not had a problem with at all. This makes up about 60% of my sales. The other ones well 70% are newbies(under 10 feedbacks) or have bought something like a $1.00 item. The others some have had a feedback as high as 200 and I was their fist neg,as they were very intimidating types,who could coerce less confrontational sellers not to neg them. I wrote to some of the sellers of these people and they told me wither they did not know how to file a FVF or they were afraid and just wanted to forget the whole thing. In fact I spoke to 4 eBay friends this afternoon, and ALL will not leave a neg, let alone file a FVF! Of course these four are the type that would never speak up if there was a disservice done. Some people. Joe
Response:
Do you think eBay’s Feedback System is sufficient? When checking feedback of prospective sellers that are very active, I find the system to be tedious in the extreme. I want eBay to add a link that displays only the comments from those buyers/sellers that have left negative ratings. Wading through many pages to find the negative comments is extremely time consuming. First, you have to expand the comments/page to 200 (maximum limit) and then, after waiting for the first 200 to be downloaded, you must do a "Find on this page" within your browser to search for "Complaint". This process must be repeated until the search fails. Now you must select the next page of 200 feedbacks and repeat the "Find on this page" within your browser. It is also bandwidth intensive as one must open successive pages. The limit of 200 responses per page is another impediment but it would not be necessary if one could click on the word "negative" (in red) to see just the negative comments. The same could be done for neutral feedback but I am _most_ concerned with how large volume resellers fare with unhappy buyers. It is no surprise that high volume sellers have plenty of positives. What I _really_ want to see is what high volume sellers do when things go wrong (wrong item shipped, item broken in shipment, item lost in shipment, item not as described in auction, etc.). I cannot imagine this would be too challenging to implement. The faster we can satisfactorily evaluate potential sellers, the faster we can place bids. Allowing buyers to place more bids in less time will, in turn, benefit sellers _and_ eBay. But if eBay is not interested in making this possible to help traders, maybe they should look at the benefits of saving a great deal of bandwidth as people page thru thousands of feedback pages (at a maximum of 200/page) to see how high volume sellers perform when things go wrong. I would also like to see feedback points weighted by such factors as: 1. the monetary value of the trade (and this value should be permanently preserved rather than being discarded after some period of time as it is now) 2. the strength of the buyer/seller’s feedback history and/or their account history (how long one has maintained an eBay account) or the number of successful trades (regardless if feedback has been left). In other words, I would put more faith in the feedback left by a seasoned buyer/seller than someone that has just begun trading or someone that has a poor record with buyers or sellers. To preclude dissent by those who want the feedback system to stay the same <sigh, eBay could easily add this functionality as an option for those who desire a more meaningful technique of evaluating potential buyers or sellers. Also, I would also like to see eBay expand the feedback comments so that both parties can more effectively communicate their disputes. Phil Pucci
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Do you think eBay’s Feedback System is sufficient? When checking feedback of prospective sellers that are very active, I find the system to be tedious in the extreme. I want eBay to add a link that displays only the comments from those buyers/sellers that have left negative ratings. Wading through many pages to find the negative comments is extremely time consuming. First, you have to expand the comments/page to 200 (maximum limit) and then, after waiting for the first 200 to be downloaded, you must do a "Find on this page" within your browser to search for "Complaint". This process must be repeated until the search fails. Now you must select the next page of 200 feedbacks and repeat the "Find on this page" within your browser. It is also bandwidth intensive as one must open successive pages. The limit of 200 responses per page is another impediment but it would not be necessary if one could click on the word "negative" (in red) to see just the negative comments. The same could be done for neutral feedback but I am _most_ concerned with how large volume resellers fare with unhappy buyers. It is no surprise that high volume sellers have plenty of positives. What I _really_ want to see is what high volume sellers do when things go wrong (wrong item shipped, item broken in shipment, item lost in shipment, item not as described in auction, etc.). I cannot imagine this would be too challenging to implement. The faster we can satisfactorily evaluate potential sellers, the faster we can place bids. Allowing buyers to place more bids in less time will, in turn, benefit sellers _and_ eBay. But if eBay is not interested in making this possible to help traders, maybe they should look at the benefits of saving a great deal of bandwidth as people page thru thousands of feedback pages (at a maximum of 200/page) to see how high volume sellers perform when things go wrong. I would also like to see feedback points weighted by such factors as: 1. the monetary value of the trade (and this value should be permanently preserved rather than being discarded after some period of time as it is now) 2. the strength of the buyer/seller’s feedback history and/or their account history (how long one has maintained an eBay account) or the number of successful trades (regardless if feedback has been left). In other words, I would put more faith in the feedback left by a seasoned buyer/seller than someone that has just begun trading or someone that has a poor record with buyers or sellers. To preclude dissent by those who want the feedback system to stay the same <sigh, eBay could easily add this functionality as an option for those who desire a more meaningful technique of evaluating potential buyers or sellers. Also, I would also like to see eBay expand the feedback comments so that both parties can more effectively communicate their disputes. Phil Pucci
First issue, eBay’s never claimed it was a technical problem preventing them from searching just for negative comments, they’ve made it quite clear that they don’t do it because they don’t want to do it, not because they aren’t able to. Listing negatives separately hurts big time sellers and benefits small time sellers. A seller with 200 positives and one negative would only have one negative, which doesn’t look so bad. A seller with 20,000 positives and 50 negatives would look terrible, with that horribly long list of unsatisfied bidders. In real life, he would have half as many negatives as the small seller as a percentage of total feedback, but that list of 50 would look worse. You can argue all you want that people would be smart enough to understand the difference, but eBay’s the one you have to convince, and they don’t agree. Since the big time sellers pay far more money to eBay than the small time sellers, who would you expect them to favor? (I’m a small time seller myself, but if I were eBay I’d favor the people who most impacted my bottom line.) Second issue, weighing the feedback number is not a realistic option, since your proposed factors are often not the key factors in determining the success of a transaction. If a person buys a $1000 item and pays for it, should that positive outweigh the 5 negatives for $50 transactions where he sold the item and it wasn’t what he described? Would his selling a $1000 laptop be more important than his sales of china if the item you were buying was china? As for weighting it by the time the user’s been a member, that information is already on the first page of the feedback page. If people are interested, they can look. Third issue, I think it would be reasonable to list the item price on the feedback line, but I don’t think it goes far enough. I think it would be better to show the auction title as well. That would show if you have experience selling the items the buyer is buying. My agreeing with you will do you no good at all though, because eBay has been asked about this numerous times in the past, and they aren’t going to do it. Fourth issue, I think the feedback line is long enough. If someone doesn’t pay, you say they don’t pay. If they don’t deliver, you say they don’t deliver. If the merchandise wasn’t as described, you say the merchandise wasn’t as described. Most people who want to leave long feedback, and who try to get around it by linking to web sites, aren’t interested in informing buyers about anything, they’re trying to blow off steam. Blowing off steam isn’t the appropriate function of the feedback page. I know feedback isn’t a perfect system, but aside from your comment about listing the item price on the feedback line, I don’t really think your suggestions would help. Since eBay doesn’t listen to me about this any more than they listen to you, it isn’t going to happen either.
Response:
I want eBay to add a link that displays only the comments from those buyers/sellers that have left negative ratings.
Doesn’t vrane have something that does this? — ‘If I don’t reply to your post it doesn’t mean you won the argument, it means my time is valuable.’
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I want eBay to add a link that displays only the comments from those buyers/sellers that have left negative ratings. Doesn’t vrane have something that does this? — ‘If I don’t reply to your post it doesn’t mean you won the argument, it means my time is valuable.’
I asked about this recently and yes it does but now it costs. Abour feedback myself I feel too much of a deal is made up of it because I know for a FACT many people do not give negs out at all for fear of one back. <sigh It also has not done me any good by saving the email of someone that threatened to give me a neg if I negged him, (I did and I got)and reporting it to safe harbor. We have gone this route before and this past month I have found that many people never do anything if they don’t get paid becasue of a few things. They really do not know how to handle a problem or the BIGGIE is they are afraid to leave a neg comment, because they value their feedback so much. I have had four non payers maybe (it has now been over three weeks) and two of them have very little feedback 5 and under. Now if they do not pay and I neg them well it is no big deal to them as they can do another ID,unless they get three FVF . So it is not that great of a system for sure. Bottom line for me is if someone doesn’t pay I file an FVF and then a neg, and await mine… So far 30% of the negs I gave have negged me back. Joe
Response:
You could always create a hosted webpage of non payers with all the details listed there? That is what i plan to do, as a url will fit in a feedback box 
And will get the feedback removed lickety split. It’s not allowed to put a URL in feedback. Deborah Stevenson
It would also violate eBays rules about exposure of personal identification, and would accomplish two things: Quick closure of the web page. Probably NARU of the eBay account. It’s funny how these folks who want to tell long tales about how horrid someone else is, all have issues that boil down to very short phrases that fit nicely into eBay’s feedback block. The more that’s written about a problem, the more thou doeth protest too much. Kris
Response:
You could always create a hosted webpage of non payers with all the details listed there? That is what i plan to do, as a url will fit in a feedback box
And will get the feedback removed lickety split. It’s not allowed to put a URL in feedback. Deborah Stevenson
Response:
You could always create a hosted webpage of non payers with all the details listed there? That is what i plan to do, as a url will fit in a feedback box S
And putting a url in a feedback is a violation of eBay’s rules, and one of the few listed reasons for a negative feedback to be removed. Following through with your plan would allow one of the people you left negative feedback for to organize all the people you left negative feedback for, get it all removed, and potentially get your account suspended. Doesn’t sound like such a good idea to me.
Response:
You could always create a hosted webpage of non payers with all the details listed there? That is what i plan to do, as a url will fit in a feedback box S
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Do you think eBay’s Feedback System is sufficient? When checking feedback of prospective sellers that are very active, I find the system to be tedious in the extreme. I want eBay to add a link that displays only the comments from those buyers/sellers that have left negative ratings. Wading through many pages to find the negative comments is extremely time consuming. First, you have to expand the comments/page to 200 (maximum limit) and then, after waiting for the first 200 to be downloaded, you must do a "Find on this page" within your browser to search for "Complaint". This process must be repeated until the search fails. Now you must select the next page of 200 feedbacks and repeat the "Find on this page" within your browser. It is also bandwidth intensive as one must open successive pages. The limit of 200 responses per page is another impediment but it would not be necessary if one could click on the word "negative" (in red) to see just the negative comments. The same could be done for neutral feedback but I am _most_ concerned with how large volume resellers fare with unhappy buyers. It is no surprise that high volume sellers have plenty of positives. What I _really_ want to see is what high volume sellers do when things go wrong (wrong item shipped, item broken in shipment, item lost in shipment, item not as described in auction, etc.). I cannot imagine this would be too challenging to implement. The faster we can satisfactorily evaluate potential sellers, the faster we can place bids. Allowing buyers to place more bids in less time will, in turn, benefit sellers _and_ eBay. But if eBay is not interested in making this possible to help traders, maybe they should look at the benefits of saving a great deal of bandwidth as people page thru thousands of feedback pages (at a maximum of 200/page) to see how high volume sellers perform when things go wrong. I would also like to see feedback points weighted by such factors as: 1. the monetary value of the trade (and this value should be permanently preserved rather than being discarded after some period of time as it is now) 2. the strength of the buyer/seller’s feedback history and/or their account history (how long one has maintained an eBay account) or the number of successful trades (regardless if feedback has been left). In other words, I would put more faith in the feedback left by a seasoned buyer/seller than someone that has just begun trading or someone that has a poor record with buyers or sellers. To preclude dissent by those who want the feedback system to stay the same <sigh, eBay could easily add this functionality as an option for those who desire a more meaningful technique of evaluating potential buyers or sellers. Also, I would also like to see eBay expand the feedback comments so that both parties can more effectively communicate their disputes. Phil Pucci First issue, eBay’s never claimed it was a technical problem preventing them from searching just for negative comments, they’ve made it quite clear that they don’t do it because they don’t want to do it, not because they aren’t able to. Listing negatives separately hurts big time sellers and benefits small time sellers. A seller with 200 positives and one negative would only have one negative, which doesn’t look so bad. A seller with 20,000 positives and 50 negatives would look terrible, with that horribly long list of unsatisfied bidders. In real life, he would have half as many negatives as the small seller as a percentage of total feedback, but that list of 50 would look worse. You can argue all you want that people would be smart enough to understand the difference, but eBay’s the one you have to convince, and they don’t agree. Since the big time sellers pay far more money to eBay than the small time sellers, who would you expect them to favor? (I’m a small time seller myself, but if I were eBay I’d favor the people who most impacted my bottom line.) Second issue, weighing the feedback number is not a realistic option, since your proposed factors are often not the key factors in determining the success of a transaction. If a person buys a $1000 item and pays for it, should that positive outweigh the 5 negatives for $50 transactions where he sold the item and it wasn’t what he described? Would his selling a $1000 laptop be more important than his sales of china if the item you were buying was china? As for weighting it by the time the user’s been a member, that information is already on the first page of the feedback page. If people are interested, they can look. Third issue, I think it would be reasonable to list the item price on the feedback line, but I don’t think it goes far enough. I think it would be better to show the auction title as well. That would show if you have experience selling the items the buyer is buying. My agreeing with you will do you no good at all though, because eBay has been asked about this numerous times in the past, and they aren’t going to do it. Fourth issue, I think the feedback line is long enough. If someone doesn’t pay, you say they don’t pay. If they don’t deliver, you say they don’t deliver. If the merchandise wasn’t as described, you say the merchandise wasn’t as described. Most people who want to leave long feedback, and who try to get around it by linking to web sites, aren’t interested in informing buyers about anything, they’re trying to blow off steam. Blowing off steam isn’t the appropriate function of the feedback page. I know feedback isn’t a perfect system, but aside from your comment about listing the item price on the feedback line, I don’t really think your suggestions would help. Since eBay doesn’t listen to me about this any more than they listen to you, it isn’t going to happen either.
If you like this post and would like to receive updates from this blog, please subscribe our feed.