PDA

View Full Version : The "feedback" panel



doctorgori
04-11-2011, 07:02 PM
Look I get it...if we started disputing feedbacks it would be a never ending mess of cyber litigation to sift though...no mod has time for that...

but for those stupid retaliatory negs or obvious scammers, why not a appointed feedback panel of voluntee AB mbrs who volunteer time to review feeback disputs based on emails sent via AB system...

wonder if there is a safe legal way for volunteer mbrs to resolve these types of disputes...

the panel could be voted on or randomly drawn from a pool...
I'd bet 12-20 folks would be enough ... even rotate "feedback" duty ona daily basis..

just a rough idea in need of fleshing out

lotsoffish
04-14-2011, 02:58 AM
I think 3 folks could handle that. Sort of like a 3 panel jury to decide who's lying and who's telling the truth, and with 3 there would be no ties when it came time to deciding. :bigthumbsup:

I could think of a few folks right in this forum who would be fine panelists.

Msdevine
04-16-2011, 02:08 PM
Look I get it...if we started disputing feedbacks it would be a never ending mess of cyber litigation to sift though...no mod has time for that...

but for those stupid retaliatory negs or obvious scammers, why not a appointed feedback panel of voluntee AB mbrs who volunteer time to review feeback disputs based on emails sent via AB system...

wonder if there is a safe legal way for volunteer mbrs to resolve these types of disputes...

the panel could be voted on or randomly drawn from a pool...
I'd bet 12-20 folks would be enough ... even rotate "feedback" duty ona daily basis..

just a rough idea in need of fleshing out



Hey Dr, didn't u send me some Killie fish last year? I am trying to remember who did as I have two males and would like to get a female to go with.

doctorgori
04-16-2011, 04:38 PM
Hey Dr, didn't u send me some Killie fish last year? I am trying to remember who did as I have two males and would like to get a female to go with.

yeah, i did, but what?

Msdevine
04-16-2011, 06:08 PM
wanna sell me a couple of females? and tell me what they are?

oneSockShort
04-16-2011, 06:27 PM
hmmm a three person panel to decide who bears responsibility for a auction gone wrong.

what a swell idea!

but i'm thinking a panelist 'could' have an axe to grind against one of the two parties,
or have an undocumented 'relationship' that would bias them toward one or the other.
so there should first be a panelist selection and disqualification step to weed out
potential problems.

also if the dispute is about the quality of fish offered a killie person wouldn't be
the best one to decide on a cichlid transaction so resumes would need to be collected
and collated (double spaced 12 point arial only please) so the best person from a group
of people could be in the panelist selection pool.

oh, and if they are from the same region, it is possible they could have a relationship
outside of aquabid so that would also have to be researched. and what if they have had
previous dealings outside of aquabid? say through ebait or the #1 tropical fish auction
site or the aka fish and egg listing or eharmony? hmmm this just keeps getting more
layered.

and what if they speak in a dialect that one of the panelists finds personally offensive
or laughable? what if they have posted really nasty stuff on the boards or the chat room?
what if they have received special treatment, good or bad, from mark the lord of aquabid?
could we tell if someone was dealing from what they believed (as mistaken as they might be)
or if their opinion was tainted in some way by something they read online?



i'm thinking we should just flip a coin.




of course the coin toss would have to be validated by a panelist of 3 persons...

doctorgori
04-16-2011, 06:47 PM
wanna sell me a couple of females? and tell me what they are?

Take a picture of them

doctorgori
04-16-2011, 06:51 PM
hmmm a three person panel to decide who bears responsibility for a auction gone wrong.

what a swell idea!

but i'm thinking a panelist 'could' have an axe to grind against one of the two parties,
or have an undocumented 'relationship' that would bias them toward one or the other.
so there should first be a panelist selection and disqualification step to weed out
potential problems.

also if the dispute is about the quality of fish offered a killie person wouldn't be
the best one to decide on a cichlid transaction so resumes would need to be collected
and collated (double spaced 12 point arial only please) so the best person from a group
of people could be in the panelist selection pool.

oh, and if they are from the same region, it is possible they could have a relationship
outside of aquabid so that would also have to be researched. and what if they have had
previous dealings outside of aquabid? say through ebait or the #1 tropical fish auction
site or the aka fish and egg listing or eharmony? hmmm this just keeps getting more
layered.

and what if they speak in a dialect that one of the panelists finds personally offensive
or laughable? what if they have posted really nasty stuff on the boards or the chat room?
what if they have received special treatment, good or bad, from mark the lord of aquabid?
could we tell if someone was dealing from what they believed (as mistaken as they might be)
or if their opinion was tainted in some way by something they read online?



i'm thinking we should just flip a coin.




of course the coin toss would have to be validated by a panelist of 3 persons...

I can see the danger of cliques, favoritism et et.... there are polls on the web you could use, and disputed feedbacks could be voted on in the feedback section using those polls...won't entirely eliminate bias should say some 0/0 go against one of the well known sellers, but its better than nothing...again like details you have suggested, the thing could use even more additional tweeks

hca75
04-16-2011, 07:09 PM
I say to rule out all the favortism possibilities, the 3 picked should NOT be in the same "cliques", and should be respected, but not have a huge "following". that would take care of that problem pretty simply. If its a majority vote, no matter if its an issue with someone a panelist knows, the other 2 are capable of overruling.

oneSockShort
04-16-2011, 07:28 PM
:laughing:


sorry, but i still feel a coin toss is a better option.
who has the time for this stuff? and are the people
who have nothing better to do than moderate disputes
between fishy people really the right people to do the
actual moderation?

i think feedback speaks for itself

one or two or six bad ones? i look to see what the other guy said.
then make up my own mind whether to take the risk

but that's just me.
have at it, could be interesting to read all
the sellers/buyers britching about the mods

oneSockShort
04-17-2011, 09:20 AM
okay, okay...
Ken, Holly, i see you both take this seriously
and i agree that the feedback system isn't a
perfect thing. retaliatory feedback can do
harm, especially if someone is just starting
out. i just don't see legislating this problem
away, do you want a system like ebait?
"if you can't post something nice then..."

there are newbs that are not newbs on the site,
looking for someone to take advantage of. there
has been talk of using some kind of positive ID
system so they can't continually return with new
and improved sheeps clothing.
hey Mark! how about offering the Aquabid VISA card!
:p

there are people who either don't have a clue or
have recently lost their clue and ship fish virtually
with a DOA guarantee. also there are buyers with
a 'leave it on the porch, i'll check for it next tuesday'
mentality that shouldn't be allowed to keep fish sticks!

rather than more and more rules, how about if some
more or less flat headed... make that level headed,
individually comes up with a sticky note about not
letting feedback rule their lives. if you sell 5 items
a year a single neg or neutral can seem devastating,
but on the mang scale this amounts to little more
than calling them a moron and listing again.

just a thought... sort of

doctorgori
04-17-2011, 11:25 AM
I have been involved will a seller with good feedback that charges a small fortune for shipping and needs to learn a thing or two...I've also been involved with a alleged 0/0 newb that keeps morphing into various aliases so he can continue to rip off buyers...
You are right Kevin, I would be a lil suspect if someone really wanted to sit on a AB jury for 24/7 and measure out "fines" et..
...and online "polls" might start biasing towards folks that spend too much time here on the forums...
but I could also see a "peoples" court being semi effective if it became semi popular...I can also see your suggestion the voting be random...
...yes you are right feedback requires common sense, but as we see there are woirk arounds and even folkks with perfect feedback can pull a half-a$$ job on occasion

oneSockShort
04-20-2011, 12:43 PM
okay, you've got me convinced that something needs to be added to help out aquabidders.

i can think of some people here that i would trust to fairly handle a dispute, but that's fairly
meaningless unless their decision had some teeth. would Mark allow feedbacks to be deleted?
or perhaps changed to a neutral from a neg with the feedback changed to... "ab commitee has determined
that the negative was unwarranted" so you could still see who the person leaving the unfair feedback was?

maybe the neg to neutral thing should go both ways in this case?

hca75
04-20-2011, 02:23 PM
just my 2 cents... take it for what its worth... LOL

I havent HAD to deal with this issue- YET. My buyers have been golden, my experience buying had been mostly AWESOME. I havent had to neg anyone, havent gotten any. But my feedback just broke the 50 mark this past week, and what would an unfair neg do to my possible future sales for awhile??? For me it would hurt me, for awhile anyway, as the majority of my buyers are newer, low feedback, like myself. A neg could scare them away.

If i mess up, Ill take the neg...no whining. I screwed up. If a get a pain in the butt buyer, that deserves a neg, Ill give it, KNOWING it could hurt me for awhile. But it shouldnt be there, thats my stance on this. That there should be some sytem for either removing, changing, ect retalitory negs for buyers and sellers alike.

When i look at auctions and someone doesnt have PERFECT feedback, i take a quick look at both parties feedback. I can usually tell which ones are unwarrented. But how many actually use some common sence???

I personally feel that the FEWER rules the better. To many rules gets way too complicated, to hard to make decisions on, ect. I say we keep it as SIMPLE as possible, life is always better that way.

So say we create a 3 person panel, 3 people who arent "buddies" "groupies" ect....who buy and sell,with x amount of feedback, and If someone wants to dispute a neg or neutral, they can take their documentaion to the panelist... including link to auction, and all emails sent and recieved, breech of terms ect.... The 3 vote on the issue, then feedback gets adjusted to whatever the panel decides. Thats simple, easy, not alot of rules and regs....majority rule. If we can all agree on a method, how to choose the panelists, and if Mark will agree.
Thats simple, to the point, gets the job done.

chocolateplaty
04-20-2011, 02:34 PM
Holly you are right on the money when you said, "That there should be some sytem for either removing, changing, ect retalitory negs for buyers and sellers alike."

As the feedback is right now, it is basically worthless IMHO as many are afraid to post a negative on a seller. I have an undeserved negative and neutral from a seller that is well known here as a horrible seller. Buyer after buyer has complained about Tropicalfishaquarium in Utah and he is still selling fish here. I do not understand why he is allowed to sell here. I asked Mark Barnett about getting my feedback changed and all I got was a posting of feedback rules. So NO, my feedback stands. YES, it really hurts a new person buying fish.

lotsoffish
04-21-2011, 09:36 PM
Holly you are right on the money when you said, "That there should be some sytem for either removing, changing, ect retalitory negs for buyers and sellers alike."

As the feedback is right now, it is basically worthless IMHO as many are afraid to post a negative on a seller. I have an undeserved negative and neutral from a seller that is well known here as a horrible seller. Buyer after buyer has complained about Tropicalfishaquarium in Utah and he is still selling fish here. I do not understand why he is allowed to sell here. I asked Mark Barnett about getting my feedback changed and all I got was a posting of feedback rules. So NO, my feedback stands. YES, it really hurts a new person buying fish.

How does a couple negative feed backs "hurt" a new buyer? I don't understand that.

In my opinion buyers are ALWAYS the folks who have very little to lose as far as feed back goes. So what if you get a couple undeserved negatives? That really doesn't affect you in any way what so ever, but if a seller starts collecting undeserved negatives it can and will effect him and his business in a VERY big way.

I am not trying to start an argument I am simply pointing that fact out to you.

You should NEVER be afraid of receiving retaliatory feed back from a BUYER. Why?

Mark
04-22-2011, 08:24 PM
@Pete What if that buyer later becomes a seller? Some sellers ban people based on their feedback.

oneSockShort
04-22-2011, 09:09 PM
yo Markie, i'm a hack programmer, but my software leaves killietrax in the dust... just sayin'

so i know it takes WORK to make changes. i think the general thought behind all
this is sellers/buyers looking for a way to defuse nasty feedback that isn't deserved.

so instead of focusing on why it's a pain in dingus to do, how about finding some way
to push this off onto some people you trust (that have been here for years) to moderate
feedback. it don't even have to mean they can block or delete feedback. just leave them
a field to indicate that the opinion of the gortons fisherman is questionable in a certain case.

please don't hurt me... i still love and respect you... well, respect you anyway.

chocolateplaty
04-24-2011, 07:28 PM
How does a couple negative feed backs "hurt" a new buyer? I don't understand that.

In my opinion buyers are ALWAYS the folks who have very little to lose as far as feed back goes. So what if you get a couple undeserved negatives? That really doesn't affect you in any way what so ever, but if a seller starts collecting undeserved negatives it can and will effect him and his business in a VERY big way.

I am not trying to start an argument I am simply pointing that fact out to you.

You should NEVER be afraid of receiving retaliatory feed back from a BUYER. Why?


It hurts a persons ego.

If the feedback was truly honest, it wouldn't make a difference, but as we know there are many sellers who are not honest with how they price their fish and inflating shipping prices.

Tom's negative feedback in my case was not true in the least. I paid on time, and trhen waited and waited. He did not send what his auction said he would. Another auction I have won, the seller did not send what was in the auction either plus he said the fish were a certain strain and they were not that strain.

So why is this kind of crap even allowed?

AmazonMoosey
04-25-2011, 07:19 AM
Doc, during my recoup time, I have tossed this back and forth in my brain since you first posted on it. It gave me something different to talk about to myself besides just the weather here. I've done the devil's advocate for it, against it, from a buyer and as a seller standpoint.

I come up with positive and negatives.

The most blatant positives of a feedback panel are the charlatan buyers and sellers negative feedback given being removed from "the norm" of buyers and sellers here. "Charlatan" seems a much more accurate description than "scammer" or "thief" etc, since the definition doesn't include just scamming for monetary gain, but also for "fame" or advantage through pretense or deception.

Would having the charlatan negative feedbacks removed or commented on by a feedback panel be enough consequences though to make this stop? Not sure it would be. There are those around here who would find that a challenge and see if they can break the system, create havoc with the system. It wouldn't be the first time on this board or the auctions for that to happen. Hell, a bet or two might even be made again to create the havoc.

Do we as buyers and sellers in today's society have the patience to wait for all, if any, kinks be worked out if such a system was put in place?

I'm still not sure it would fix all the issues. We know it won't stop the thread take over or gang piling. Do we, as buyers and sellers, even have a cohesive idea of what the criteria needs to be for a removal of a charlatan negative feedback or feedback panel comment? If so, I would like to see it, read it. If we don't, shouldn't we know what it is exactly we are wanting/asking of Barnett?

IMO, it might help to present a cohesive and concise suggestion/proposition to Barnett. It really would be a much fairer way of asking for what we would like rather than throwing wants/ideas at Barnett and wanting him to fix it for us.

doctorgori
04-25-2011, 10:16 AM
Gail, et all.....I've read every post and this is clearly one of those things where everyone has a valid point...
my stongest thoughts are in its present form the feedback is only semi-useful....I can relate exactly to the point about being afraid to neg someone because of the retalitory consequences:
two examples:
I didn't neg Warren when he ran up that moema quii auction to over $200 then said he couldn't pay, nor did I neg that kid that ran up the auction on my java moss then said he wasn't paying because he got a better deal...there are more but my point is there are morons and chldren lurking out there with inflated feedbacks because many people like me would let them slide rather than take the hit..

Yeah, I agree if Mark can't do it alone, there is certainly enuff volunteer help on AB to assist....
I dunno about programming or the amount of work but perhaps creat or modify one area for "feedback disputes"...allow voting using "filtered polls" wherein you gotta have 50/50 to vote....don't allow any facts in evidence presented outside AB mail sytem or pictures.... I'm thinking the biggest headace would be in programing the poll code....but again, just throwing stuff out there

AmazonMoosey
04-25-2011, 01:19 PM
I still think the cart is going before the horse, Doc. We haven't even flushed out between the buyers and sellers what we agree on to even go before a panel or vote. I'd use me for the example below, but that seemed to have irritated some in a previous thread. So Doc, thanx for volunteering...:p

You file a complaint as a Seller that you received a retaliatory feedback for negating a non-responsive Bidder to the "feedback panel". What criteria would "the feedback panel" have set up to insure you did the proper steps as a Seller?

I "assume" they will follow the FAQS for auctions verbatim, with some additional information.

Did you as a Seller email the Buyer through AquaBid and a private email?
Did you keep the emails with the headers so we know the actual date and stamp time of the email?
Did you file the first Breach of Sale?
Did you file the second Breach of Sale?
Did you check your spam folders for possible contact erroneously sent to your spam or junk folder?

Or, is it because you are Doc - the feedback panel says "Hey, this is Doc and we know he does it right. He's a whopper of a seller for saltwater rocks - we can trust him! Get that negative feedback off his account right now, Barnett!"



That's just one scenario as a Seller presenting for feedback removal - there are quite a few more. The requirements are not the same for each of the scenarios.

Doc, I know you understand that some won't want to have followed the rules set up, or they didn't know about the rules cuz who reads directrions, or their computer crashed, or their dog ate their proof. Some will want exceptions made for a variety of reasons.

I just don't think Barnett is going to take us seriously on this until we as Buyers and Sellers flush this out completely and present him a precise and deliberate plan that addresses the contigencies that will occur.

What about going and starting a blog here for feedback panel discussion - doesn't it have polls? There it could be flushed out publicly with open participation. What is agreed on to present to Barnett could go on the blog so he doesn't have to read through our mental meanderings.

I'm not picking on you Doc. I would like to see this happen. I also know you don't have hissy fits when brainstorming if I disagree with you, :captain:.

Mark
04-25-2011, 01:26 PM
Please note anyone on a panel would be subject to a lawsuit. They could easily be added to lawsuit against AquaBid.com.

AmazonMoosey
04-25-2011, 01:49 PM
Please note anyone on a panel would be subject to a lawsuit. They could easily be added to lawsuit against AquaBid.com.

Hmmm... Doc asked clear back on the 11 of this month "wonder if there is a safe legal way for volunteer mbrs to resolve these types of disputes..."

If a panel gave an "opinion" to you, based on information - could they still be sued for their "opinion"?

Mark
04-25-2011, 02:52 PM
In regards to a lawsuit, anything is possible. Does not mean the person would win, but the volunteer would have to pay a lawyer to defense. I got dragged into 15 million lawsuit before. I think it cost me about $2000 before I settled out.

http://www.boingboing.net/2002/03/11/petswarehouse-sues-c.html

AmazonMoosey
04-25-2011, 03:12 PM
I very well remember all that from around here and the link. It was a bloody mess that many who participate around here have no clue it happened.

And I understand about being drug into lawsuits having been in a couple myself. Even though the outcome was found as frivolous lawsuits, I would then had to spend money to countersue for that. Some people must like courtrooms a ton; I just wanted the damn time waster stress mill done.

Sounds more like we need an Aqua Boards Lawyer fish keeper who is up on the current laws to defend you and the volunteers before there are even any real talk about feedback panels.

It's easy to say "A lawsuit for helping with feedback at AquaBid/AquaBoards? That would never happen! You just worry too much!" if you have never been involved in a frivolous or a supposedly "real" lawsuit.

I thought of the lawsuit and the past when I posted, but since no comment had been made to Doc about the legalities, I figured some brainiac had come up with a way around it. Wishful thinking on my part, obviously.

lotsoffish
04-26-2011, 12:54 AM
Can I say something here?

First of all I don't see a lawsuit ever applying to an Aquabid auction just because of the fact there is no real money involved in feed back. Who the hell would sue somebody cuz they gave them a negative? What are you going to sue them for? Being a MORON????????? Let's forget about the lawsuits for now and look at the issues that would warrant a "review".

It seems to me we COULD have a system set up that would make feed back "reviewable" under certain situations only. If the NFL can do it why can't AquaBid?

Two that come to mind immediately for me is buyers who NEVER pay and sellers who fail to ship. In those two cases both the buyer and the seller should have some sort of proof they carried out what the person calling for the review claims they didn't. Barnett OR the review board could simply E Mail the party in question and ask them to remit their proof they carried out their end of the deal. If after say 2 weeks time they fail to remit the requested proof that they actually carried out what they are being accused of NOT carrying out Barnett or the review board reverses the negative and the case is closed.

What's wrong with that idea? And PLEASE don't say something like"What if the buyer sends cash?"

My answer to that would be, "then the buyer is out of luck cuz anyone with a brain knows it's NOT a good idea to send cash through the mail." :evil:

What this type of system would do is most likely eliminate a lot of the issues that tend to prevent honest folks from giving lying LOSERS the negative feed backs they deserve in a timely manner.

These would NOT be judgment calls. I think it's almost impossible to have a system for reversing crap based on judgment calls. Calls like whether or not some guppies I auctioned off are actual good quality or not OR if the Zebra pleco is actually a female like the seller said it was. Those are judgment calls, but whether or not a seller ACTUALLY shipped to somebody isn't and that seller should have some sort of proof he actually sent something out and a BUYER should also have some sort of proof he actually paid for something too.

chocolateplaty
04-26-2011, 01:03 AM
Maybe there is a way to make this system better with just changing the order of feedback being posted.

What if the seller were to post the first feedback?

The seller could only comment on how fast the payment came in and how the payment was made. Ex: Buy paid by paypal in the first 24 hours after the auction closed. or Buy paid by money order. That says it took longer to get the money. or Buyer never contacted me nor have they sent money. No implacations are made only facts are written.

This way the buyer knows what will be said about how and when the payment was made.

To me this is the way it should be anyway with the seller posting first.

Then the seller posts. Buyer sent auction items 24 hours after I paid for them. Buyer sent auction items three weeks after I paid for them. Buyer sent items 4 months after I paid for them. Buyer sent items 24 hours after I paid for them however FedEx did not deliver at posted time of delivery. Buyer sent auction items 24 hours after receiving payment, however the fish sent were not according to auction description. Buyer sent items 24 hours after receiving payment however they arrived DOA.

Once again no implacations are being made, just a statement of facts. Sellers would not want future bidders to know they are bad at shipping, or they send lesser quality than advertized, or whatever the problem would be.

I feel that this would be a more honest way of handling feedback.

Does this make sense? Would it solve many problems the system in place now has? Would it work?

RMC
04-26-2011, 04:24 AM
How long has AquaBid operated with the current system? :king:

AmazonMoosey
04-26-2011, 04:51 AM
What you are asking with that is an all encompassing trust of all buyers immediately. That isn't going to happen. I will treat all buyers respectfully, but buyers have to earn my trust just as sellers have to earn my trust. Not all buyers are trustworthy, up front any more than all sellers are. The few buyers I have banned have to deal with how they have behaved with other sellers during and after their transactions.

Some buyers just by their very actions in the forums are not trustworthy and don't deserve respect. Same for Sellers, but you are wanting guaranteed feedback for Buyers so, let's talk about Buyers.

Transactions are not complete because a buyer paid. Transactions are done when a buyer has the item in hand and lets the seller know the item is in hand.

That isn't Moose's standard - that is the standard set many years ago by Barnett when we argued all this back then.

So, forcing a Seller to give feedback first is not viable. What would stop a charlatan buyer with a chip on his/her shoulder from seeing feedback, reversing paypal charges and saying they never got the stuff? Not a thing. Yes, that happens - used to happen with personal checks. Some have even tried with Paypal.

Why do you think sellers quit taking checks? Because sellers are mean and crotchety and out to make buyers miserable? No. They quit taking personal checks because of charlatan bidders who did stop payments, forgeries,checks on closed accounts or ones who didn't know how to live within their means.

I can think of many instances over the years of a whapped out buyer who I was not about to give feedback to until they said they had their goods in hand. I don't care if they paid the instance the auction closed. On Yahoo auctions I had one guy neg me the moment the auction closed, saying I had never shipped and stole his money.

I can think of buyers who over the years, sent me 50 bucks for items and then felt they owned my every minute the next 50 years and would email 5 or 10 times a day. If you didn't respond immediately, they'd try to lord the money over you, telling you that they were a paying customer. I had one guy who wanted to come stay a weekend cuz he bought 100 bucks worth of goods through me and was gonna be in town. He was ticked off and said he would trash my user name for being so rude to say no.

Forcing a Seller to give feedback at the time of payment is trying to guarantee positive feedback for a Buyer and IMO as a buyer and a seller - asinine.


Pete, you asked "
Who the hell would sue somebody cuz they gave them a negative? What are you going to sue them for? Being a MORON????????? Let's forget about the lawsuits for now and look at the issues that would warrant a "review"."

Yet the lawsuit Barnett was involved in was people posting negative comments about a Seller.

Do you remember why Barnett was involved? It sure wasn't because Barnett had gone around saying negative comments about the company. It was because of what had been posted on the forums.

Your two examples sound great - but if the shipper shipped and has proof of shipment but the buyer says they never got it and gives a neg - how is it not a judgement calls?

Unless sellers have ALL packages signed for, there is NO PROOF the buyer never really received the package.


Keep hammering it out - at least once done maybe there will be something viable to present to Barnett.

Mark
04-26-2011, 05:19 AM
It seems to me we COULD have a system set up that would make feed back "reviewable" under certain situations only. If the NFL can do it why can't AquaBid?

All negative feedback is put into a queue for review. This stops the person from bidding on 100s of auctions and immediately posting negative feedback.

doctorgori
04-26-2011, 09:02 AM
Mark, Gail et all...
I get the legal consequences that might be at play here...but since when has a internet based "poll" been subject to libel exposure? (maybe it can be, I dunno)

...Gail you said "cart before the horse"...and I said: (or thought I said)
I was throwing this out here FOR fleshing out (If not here is my disclaimer: I need input/improvement on this idea)...
what: So we stop submitting ideas because they aren't totally fleshed out or fool proofed first?

Anyway, perhaps a "possible" solution is a combination of the aformentioned suggestions: use the feedback area where "plaintif" and/or "defendant" is notified of the new Negative and summoned to appear on the feedback forum to submit proof of claim (evidence in support of thier negative or innocence or whatever)

...bantering this stuff about....

...obviously emails generated by AB should have the most weight as does any picture whose forgery would carries REAL world legal consequences (like post office reciepts, proof of delivery, MO's et)...

...failure to show up by the "court date" results in a default judgement

...a running poll show the percentages from the "jury voting"...

...and BTW, you can't totally get rid of popularity bias, nor should you....people earn thier reputations even if it means they can screw up (to a point) and sorta get away with it...

AmazonMoosey
04-26-2011, 09:47 AM
Mark, Gail et all...
I get the legal consequences that might be at play here...but since when has a internet based "poll" been subject to libel exposure? (maybe it can be, I dunno)

...Gail you said "cart before the horse"...and I said: (or thought I said)
I was throwing this out here FOR fleshing out (If not here is my disclaimer: I need input/improvement on this idea)...
what: So we stop submitting ideas because they aren't totally fleshed out or fool proofed first?.

Nahhh...remember I said asked if we as buyers and sellers had the patience in today's society to work out the kinks. Those kinks include the legal if any ramifications. See Barnett's post of "Please note anyone on a panel would be subject to a lawsuit. They could easily be added to lawsuit against AquaBid.com. "

Barnett wasn't posting on or about a feedback panel at the time - only posted to pete that a negative feedback to a buyer could hurt that buyer later if they became a seller.

The cart before the horse comment was more for the your suggestion of 15 to 20 and possibly rotating people, going down to just 3 people doing it and still no input on any of it from Barnett. It was reading a few here were gearing up for this to be a real possibility.

I'm just saying wouldn't it be best to know what Barnett is willing to accept as help as well as knowing where a feedback panel would stand legally? Along with that, wouldn't it be a good idea to have a majority of the Sellers and Buyers input? Not saying that the input here is bad or inadequate, just saying it is a really freakin small fraction of the whole cart of sellers and buyers even paying attention to this.

So far, I haven't seen anything close to Barnett saying he would even accept a feedback panel being a part of the feedback. Maybe Barnett has to some of you and I just didn't get the bare butted moose gif via email to know.

Sides, Doc - if you don't have a devil's advocate and only have people who agree with you, how are you gonna know you've thought something through completely? How will you know you've really fleshed something out and worked out the kinks? :p

What about the suggestion of creating a sticky for the forums and for the auctions based on the FAQs with the simple steps to take as a Biider/Seller?

Mark
04-26-2011, 12:00 PM
A panel is not out of the question. Not my first choice. Issues are legal and privacy. Sometimes things like address and telephones are submitted.

Thinking more on the lines of revamping the report a violation form. May require this filled out and processes before a negative feedback can be posted. Making a place where both parties can see all communications. You would have to use this section for all replies.

chocolateplaty
04-26-2011, 12:16 PM
[QUOTE=AmazonMoosey;394877][I][B]
What you are asking with that is an all encompassing trust of all buyers immediately.


Isn't the opposite true right now. I have trusted sellers and have gotten burned. Even when you check the feedbacks that are in place, as suggested in this forum, you still can get burned by a seller. My last burn was a shipping bill for $152.24. And to think the seller told me to do it his way as the shipping would be less.


"That isn't going to happen."


And just why not? Are you making the rules here? You seem to have so many negatives for everything that has been posted so far. Have you come up with anything positive or is this just your nature?



" I will treat all buyers respectfully, but buyers have to earn my trust just as sellers have to earn my trust. Not all buyers are trustworthy, up front any more than all sellers are. The few buyers I have banned have to deal with how they have behaved with other sellers during and after their transactions."


Everyone needs to earn your trust? You banned buyers bacause of someone else's dealings? Did you even give them a chance? They did nothing to you.


"Some buyers just by their very actions in the forums are not trustworthy and don't deserve respect. Same for Sellers, but you are wanting guaranteed feedback for Buyers so, let's talk about Buyers."


What is this guaranteed feedback for Buyers. I never used those words. I asked if the system could be reversed. Some buyers don't post feedback on all auctions just as all sellers do not post feedback on all auctions.


"Transactions are not complete because a buyer paid. Transactions are done when a buyer has the item in hand and lets the seller know the item is in hand."


This would be a good time for the seller to leave feedback. However you have pointed out that crap can still happen so this would then need to be worked on.


"That isn't Moose's standard - that is the standard set many years ago by Barnett when we argued all this back then."


And isn't that what is being discussed, to change the standard? Members here are saying the standard isn't working well and isn't there a better way? I do not know if the standards worked well when they were first set up, however they do not seem to be working very well now with so many complaining about them. When something doesn't work well someone else will come along with something better and people will use it. Leaving ebay and coming to aquabid is a great example. Is this what is wanted here?

"So, forcing a Seller to give feedback first is not viable."


Who used the word "force"? Please do not add something to this thread that was not there!!!!! Remember the childhood game called "gossip" where a sentence is passed from child to child. At the end the original sentence isn't what was started with. This I see so often on this forum, people add "loaded" words that have no place in the forum.


"What would stop a charlatan buyer with a chip on his/her shoulder from seeing feedback, reversing paypal charges and saying they never got the stuff? Not a thing. Yes, that happens - used to happen with personal checks. Some have even tried with Paypal."


I think with all the knowledgeable people on this forum there could be a solution to this too.


"Why do you think sellers quit taking checks? Because sellers are mean and crotchety and out to make buyers miserable? No. They quit taking personal checks because of charlatan bidders who did stop payments, forgeries,checks on closed accounts or ones who didn't know how to live within their means."


Sounds to me like a simple solution was found. There will always be people who try to rob the bank bacause they do not have a lot of money.


"I can think of many instances over the years of a whapped out buyer who I was not about to give feedback to until they said they had their goods in hand. I don't care if they paid the instance the auction closed. On Yahoo auctions I had one guy neg me the moment the auction closed, saying I had never shipped and stole his money.

I can think of buyers who over the years, sent me 50 bucks for items and then felt they owned my every minute the next 50 years and would email 5 or 10 times a day. If you didn't respond immediately, they'd try to lord the money over you, telling you that they were a paying customer. I had one guy who wanted to come stay a weekend cuz he bought 100 bucks worth of goods through me and was gonna be in town. He was ticked off and said he would trash my user name for being so rude to say no."

Don't we all learn from our experiences? I was told by many on this forum to take my new knowledge and get on with my life, to let it go. It was good advice and I have moved on.


"Forcing a Seller to give feedback at the time of payment is trying to guarantee positive feedback for a Buyer and IMO as a buyer and a seller - asinine."


Here you use the word force again. I didn't use that word. As far as guaranteeing positive feedback that is not true either as I see this process. The seller is just responding to how and when he received payment and I truly belive that is how it should be.
You are intitled to your opinion. It is just an opinion. Did you miss my point entirely when I posted: Once again no implacations are being made, just a statement of facts. There are really no judgements being made except possible one.

The fish sent were not what the auction stated. I have received substitutes without my knowledge. The seller found himself out of what was auctioned so rather than a refund a substitute was made. That should have been handled in an email prior to sending but it wasn't.

Lastly your word "asinine" is a very loaded word. It has these synonyms: silly, stupid, foolish, unintelligent, and idiotic.
There are rules about saying rude remarks to people on this forum. I really feel your last remark about my post was not in good taste or acceptable to be posted here.

When someone offers or suggests a change, their suggestion does not need to be evaluated with the word asinine by another persons opinion. I just wonder which definition of opinion you are refering to?
opinion:
1. the view somebody takes about a certain issue, especially when it is based solely on personal judgement
2. a view regarding the worth of somebody or something
3. an expert assessment of something
4. general assessment, judgement, or evaluation
5. a conclusion drawn from observation of the facts

AmazonMoosey
04-26-2011, 12:33 PM
A panel is not out of the question. Not my first choice. Issues are legal and privacy. Sometimes things like address and telephones are submitted.

Thinking more on the lines of revamping the report a violation form. May require this filled out and processes before a negative feedback can be posted. Making a place where both parties can see all communications. You would have to use this section for all replies.

The report revamp sounds good. Fed Ex did something very similar for damaged shipments. I haven't had a claim to file in years with them, but a customer wrote and said they loved a very large solid log piece, but it was damaged but they were happy with it and were going to keep it.

The claim they filed with fed ex sure didn't match their email at all. Fed Ex was able to see my emails, their emails and I was able to see their damage report filed to fed ex. Made my life tons easier.

Choco - I didn't say you had to like my views - they are mine. But if you think you want to argue about my views and why you think mine are wrong - take it to a new thread so it isn't bugging people that don't give a damn about either of our views.

hca75
04-26-2011, 01:36 PM
I second Moosey, that would definately be a step in the right direction... works for me.:D

Choc- I think you need to take the advise you said you took, and move on. You still sound like you are holding grudges for things you said you have moved on from. Life's to short for that...

As for sellers banning bidders they havent yet dealt with, i am probably only one of many. If a buyer burns a seller, chances are they will do it again. I am not leaving myself open to that.

oneSockShort
04-26-2011, 04:15 PM
hey chocolateplaty ... take a breath.

your views are welcome, no really. i think we are all looking for a way to improve AB.
scratch that, it's not aquabid that needs fixing, it's the people who are online to snatch
every dime they can, by any means they can.

so, be a friend, suggest whatever you wish.

but we are here to make things better. moosey didn't rip you off, did she?
i didn't read her post as an attack on you... relax

and um, welcome to aquabid

hca75
04-26-2011, 04:37 PM
Well said Socks....

lotsoffish
04-26-2011, 06:44 PM
Well Moosey, here's my final take on this crap.

If a buyer gives me a negative even though he NEVER PAID or communicated with me OR a BUYER gives me a negative claiming I never shipped his stuff EVEN THOUGH I have a receipt from Pay pal showing I paid the USPS to ship a box to that persons address AND the USPS delivery confirmation number SHOWING it was delivered to that address then BUYERS have way to much of an advantage over sellers.

lotsoffish
04-26-2011, 07:56 PM
Your two examples sound great - but if the shipper shipped and has proof of shipment but the buyer says they never got it and gives a neg - how is it not a judgement calls?

Unless sellers have ALL packages signed for, there is NO PROOF the buyer never really received the package.


Keep hammering it out - at least once done maybe there will be something viable to present to Barnett.

I am glad you brought this up. It is the perfect example of what I am talking about. I was in the buyers shoes a couple weeks a go. I won 1 trio of very classy swordtail's and I ended up paying OVER 200 bucks to get my hands on this line. The weather was very "changeable" and I WANTED this line of fish so I asked the seller to ship the USPS Express to my door AND I notified my mail lady they were coming and told her this was an "important" box etc.

The day they were supposed to arrive she dropped them off here while I was still SLEEPING and set them INSIDE my door where it's warm. She came BACK to my house around 1:30 PM to have me sigh for them cuz she figured I was sleeping when she dropped them off earlier.

My point to all this is in MY OPINION it is up to ME, the BUYER to make sure things work out smoothly here on MY END and if a seller sent me a box of fish and the USPS claimed they dropped it off but I never got it I would immediately get a hold of my mail lady and ask her where the hell my box was cuz SHE WOULD KNOW what happened to it. Not the seller who is 500 miles away. When you are having important perishable "stuff" delivered to yourself you have to be on the ball. I would be acting like a MORON if I would have blamed the SELLER cuz I was SLEEPING when my box arrived and my mail lady wasn't on the same page as I was.

If the USPS claimed they delivered a box to me and I never got it I would march right down to the post office, find out who scanned it in delivered, and ask that person where the hell they delivered the box to cuz they outta know. Not the SELLER. How's he going to know? The USPS is telling him they did deliver it to the proper place.

That said, I think in this situation the "review board" should REMOVE the negative from the sellers feed back and tell the unhappy buyer to take it up with his local post office cuz THEY and he were the ones that screwed up, not the shipper.

doctorgori
04-26-2011, 09:12 PM
if there was some proof of age, I'd bet EASILY 50% of the shenanagins on AB are caused by kids and teenies attracted to shiny & expensive things like fish...the other 50% of the scams and problems are caused by sexually starved looozars who live beyond thier means (and NO doubt have a plethora of expensive and useless vices like collecting fish, star wars action figures, or spend hours on X-Box, et)

...anyway, my point is feeback is extremely important esp. when someone isn't using a physical brick and mortar and directly exchange barter, or can't use the BBS or some other "sanctioned" agency as proof of trustworthyness ....
not sure how much responsibility AB bears for verification chores when the agreement to excange barter is between two responsible adult, but certainly as a trading venue AB could better facilitate the ability the "grade" a buyers/sellers honesty/competence

lotsoffish
04-26-2011, 10:19 PM
I think 99% of the issues I have ran in to were caused by MORONS who are LAZY and feel no obligation to do their part to make sure everything ends up working out properly. And what I really find annoying is those folks take time away from the folks that are truly enjoyable to deal with.

Mark
04-27-2011, 05:11 AM
Well Moosey, here's my final take on this crap.

If a buyer gives me a negative even though he NEVER PAID or communicated with me OR a BUYER gives me a negative claiming I never shipped his stuff EVEN THOUGH I have a receipt from Pay pal showing I paid the USPS to ship a box to that persons address AND the USPS delivery confirmation number SHOWING it was delivered to that address then BUYERS have way to much of an advantage over sellers.

Of course the is assuming that the seller sent the right thing. All transactions are not cut and dry.

lotsoffish
04-27-2011, 12:42 PM
Of course the is assuming that the seller sent the right thing. All transactions are not cut and dry.


That's different than saying the seller never shipped at all. In THAT case the negative should stand.

I think if you had THE RIGHT folks doing these "reviews" they would get to the bottom of who screwed who in these deals.

Get a few older woman on this board to do it. Woman that raised like 8 kids would be perfect. They would have plenty of experience at weeding through all the BS to actually find out who's slinging it and who's not.

Besides perhaps you have to have a third option, again just like the NFL. The results of the challenge are----------------INCONCLUSIVE. :evil:

Come on commissioner Barnett, set up a rules committee and get with the program. :football:

hca75
04-27-2011, 01:19 PM
Get a few older woman on this board to do it. Woman that raised like 8 kids would be perfect. They would have plenty of experience at weeding through all the BS to actually find out who's slinging it and who's not.

:gickle: :rofl: Pete... your on to something,,, but it doesnt take raising 8 + kids, just 2... plenty of experience weeding threw the BS... Thats why mom's rule!!!! :p

As for the feedback issue... I really dont care if we have a panel, or just do the update on the violation form, like mentioned... just along as there is SOME change for the better. I'd be happy with that.

I buy and sell... and As a buyer, you cant just PAY up and your done... you have to WATCH for your box, check your delivery confirmation number, and make sure you get it. I had the PO take a box i had coming to me, to the opposite address... Im a ____ N. street, they took it to ___- S. street. The seller addressed the box CORRECT, but the PO messed up, sent it out on the wrong truck, delivered it to the WRONG house... My mail came, no box. I asked, as it showed up as DELIVERED.... They tracked it down, brought it to me in less than an hour. If i hadnt been on the ball, I wouldve LOSt that box of fish. It was my responcibiltiy to get on my post office to find out WHERE it went, the seller had no control over it. So i agree completely w/ you Pete... on this!!

beth
04-27-2011, 01:44 PM
Example: Mr. Seller (56/55) vs Mr. Buyer (5/5).

Mr. Seller is quite computer savvy, an ebay veteran and he knows the ins & outs of PayPal.

Mr. Buyer isn't good with technology and English is not his first language.

Mr. Seller auctions an expensive fish, let's say a flowerhorn, Mr. Buyer wins.

The seller has a better offer for the fish locally and sells the fish for cash. At first he thinks he will refund Mr. Buyer's money but later decides he will try to ship an inferior fish. After all, he knows how PayPal works and knows as long as he ships something, anything, he has a chance of winning a dispute. To minimize his possible monetary losses (in case he ends up having to refund everything), he sends the fish Priority instead of Express which the buyer has paid for (thinking he was getting a top notch fish).

The buyer knows he didn't receive the right fish but not sure what to do. He emails the seller who claims it is the same but must have changed color from stress, just be patient and the color will come back... blah blah blah... whatever. The buyer opens a dispute with PayPal on the advice of a friend.

The seller has since deleted the photo of the original fish from his Photobucket account. Has tracking info showing something was shipped and delivered and all the other remnants of a normal transaction.

The best PayPal can do for the buyer is say they will refund the money if he ships the fish back. Mr. Buyer doesn't have a clue how to ship fish, has no supplies. He says F' it and decides to just take the loss and move on. He leaves negative feedback for Mr. Seller, gets some in return.

Well of course Mr. Seller is pissed and wants his feedback fixed even though he knows he deserves every word of it. He supplies photos and emails and tracking info etc and most of all, an email full of the best BS he can come up with for the *panel*.

The panel sends an email to Mr Buyer asking him to supply evidence to make his case that the feedback was justified. This guy has been ripped off and tried to do the right thing by warning others. But he doesn't have the original photo of the fish he bought, doesn't have a nice digital camera to photograph the junk fish he received and doesn't have a good enough grasp of the English language to make a good case for himself. So again he says F' it and doesn't bother to defend himself. He has nothing to GAIN by trying. Where is his incentive? He already knows never to buy from Mr. Seller again.

The panel decides in favor of the seller. Mr. Seller is rewarded with whatever benefit this bestows and poor Mr. Buyer is stuck with his retaliatory negative.

This outcome is worse than someone simply getting retaliatory feedback. Any time something is subjective, requires an opinion, sooner or later a mistake will be made.

This is only an example of factors which can contribute to legitimate bad feedback being removed by a panel of judges. I do not intend it to be an example of a situation which may arise, only highlighting problems in getting to the truth. There are so many things, including simple apathy, which could keep the judges from getting the accurate info needed.

Do you want it to come down to a battle of wits? Because that is what you are asking for if people have to present their case to a panel of judges. Not to mention that many kinds of *proof* can be faked pretty convincingly, again giving the edge to the more clever person.

There is plenty of incentive for the victim to contact PayPal and provide the required info, they hope to get their money back. Feedback is for the benefit of others, the victim already has learned his or her lesson. Unless there is something in it for them, I don't see the kind of compliance which would be needed.

AmazonMoosey
04-27-2011, 03:08 PM
Beth - that put it consisely what could easily go wrong with a feedback panel that wasn't being discussed. Thanx for doing that.

I think Doc is on the right track on who are the majority of the charlatan bidders; kids and teens. I think Pete is spot on many many buyers do not do their part. That puts me leaning even more for the revamping of the violation report.

I still like the idea that was nay say'd long ago on verifying people before they can bid, with Paypal, et all. While it would end many of the kids, it creates its own caveat of new problematic issues. So I am leaning towards a sticky to coinside with the revamp of the violation report. With that sticky for Buyers and Sellers with specific suggestions towards each to help (such as Pete's about being ready and prepared to accept fish - and tips on how to do it, like working with your own Post Office so they are working WITH you and it doesn't feel like its AGAINST you).

I am not so sure it is lazy or moronic behavior in most Pete, why some buyers seem to have more trouble. Part of it is they only read sporadic help on what to look for here. You'd have to go through every thread to pull all the information out. I think more of it is they get one or so shipments under their belt delivered to them easily, and think every fish shipment is the same and a snap and all fish should be as easy as 1,2,3. It just isn't.

Anyone who has received and/or shipped a multitude of shipments knows that shipping fish and receiving them is as diverse as the number of people on this forum. There are fish that are hardier than others just by species, there are the varying contigencies that happen to the fish prior to shipping, also during shipping and even when unbagging the fish that makes each box different.

RMC
04-27-2011, 03:11 PM
Why isn't the buyer and/or seller a female?

:king:

Underwhelmed
04-27-2011, 03:20 PM
And what is TPSOSC? And what could it do for us?

Also, should the title of this thread be the feedback "panel" not the "feedback" panel, since the feedback already exists, but the "panel" doesn't?

RMC
04-27-2011, 03:24 PM
.... and how does the "Death Squad" fit into all of this? Will birth certificates or Social Security Numbers be required?

I'm confused :king:

AmazonMoosey
04-27-2011, 03:38 PM
Why isn't the buyer and/or seller a female?

:king:

Well, you can be female if you want...but you will have to pass the TSA pat downs on a much more regular basis.

So does your presence here mean you are around to stay for a while? If so, welcome back. If not, well then, don't forget to close the screen door to keep the skeeters out.

Lol@Whelmed

vegetarian_great_white
04-27-2011, 03:53 PM
Also, should the title of this thread be the feedback "panel" not the "feedback" panel, since the feedback already exists, but the "panel" doesn't?

Depends where you stand. If you are in the world of panels, all kinds of panels exist but a "feedback" panel is unheard of. If you are looking from the feedback end, you may have heard a lot of things about feedback but a feedback "panel"? Maybe Doc is on other panels that we don't know about. If any other panel existed in Aquabid, would "panel" rather than "feedback" still get quotations?

I mean I don't know, I am not a native speaker. Just here to learn :)))

hca75
04-27-2011, 05:40 PM
Beth, You do have a very valid point on how the panel could go 'bad" and vote in favor of the dishonest seller.

The revamped violation form is definatley an option, and a step in the right direction with all this, without possible lawsuits.

Nothing is going to be PERFECT... there will be drawbacks to whatever is decided upon, as we are all imperfectly human, even kids, teens, and as Pete would put it- MORONS.

If we have SOME sort of change for the better, like a revamped form, Im all for it. Some change, for the better is better than NOTHING... its a step in the right direction, correct?

So besides the panel or "panel", ( couldnt resist :p) or a revamped form, does anyone have any other ideas that would be DOABLE,( for MARK) to make a positive change in the system that would help weed out scammers,kids on buying binges, or retalitory negs?????

lotsoffish
04-27-2011, 06:08 PM
Beth - that put it consisely what could easily go wrong with a feedback panel that wasn't being discussed. Thanx for doing that.



Do you have ANY idea how annoying I find folks like you to be?

I am WAY to busy to be posting again in this thread BUT I just gotta say it.

THE FEED BACK PANEL would work out JUST FINE IF Mark picked folks like YOU AND BETH to be on it.

Of course it will FAIL if he picks a bunch of NAIVE MORONS to be on the panel. :roll:

AmazonMoosey
04-27-2011, 06:18 PM
Do you have ANY idea how annoying I find folks like you to be?[/QUTOE]

No, but if you hum a few bars, maybe I can remember....

[QUOTE=lotsoffish;395071]I am WAY to busy to be posting again in this thread BUT I just gotta say it.

THE FEED BACK PANEL would work out JUST FINE IF Mark picked folks like YOU AND BETH to be on it.

ROFL IS THAT what you meant by "old women" ??? I just thought you meant you meant old men who weren't able to hear or see anymore past their nose hairs!

I don't think Beth is gonna like the idea of being called "old". As for you calling me "old" hell, that's a ton better than your other names you have called me in the cafe. :nahnah: I must have gone up in the world and not even known it!!! laughing Either that or you are getting a touch soft in your old age....


Of course it will FAIL if he picks a bunch of NAIVE MORONS to be on the panel. :roll:

Yeah, don't trust those naives. Don't trust the niave morons either. You know, you are gonna get fussed at for being rude now you know...... :p

hca75
04-27-2011, 06:33 PM
Ok , my point is, we need to quit argueing, and start actually trying to work on AGREEING to a system and working the kinks out of that, so SOMETHING can actually CHANGE in a positive manner. We can all discuss the panel, the revamped form, or someone being certified before bidding, forever, and nothing is going to actually change, till we band together, and agree on SOMETHING, either one of those 3 suggestions, or something else that could also work.

Alot of us agreed that we needed more room for feedback, and we GOT it... so lets quit griping, and start compromising here.... so we can all get the change we want...even tho right now we cant agree on what the change should BE...

Oh and moosey, Id rather get called OLD.... LOL

lotsoffish
04-27-2011, 06:43 PM
Yeah, don't trust those naives. Don't trust the niave morons either. You know, you are gonna get fussed at for being rude now you know...... :p

Good that means folks are at least listening to my rantings. They can fuss themselves to death it don't bother me.

lotsoffish
04-27-2011, 06:51 PM
so lets quit griping, and start compromising here....


Are you serious?

"Compromise" is not even a part of my vocabulary.

I'm going back down to the politics forum where folks actually understand me.

I just don't want to get an undeserved negative cuz then I will have to burn somebody's house to the ground and I could get in a lot of trouble for that. :evil:

AmazonMoosey
04-27-2011, 06:51 PM
LOL Were Pete and I arguing? Hell and I thought that was the nicest we've spoken to each other in 6 years....damn - try harder next time Pete!

Suggestions - well work on Doc's concern - kids. That would mean people register by proving who they are with a payment with a confirmed address and matching name before they ever even bid. Barnett in past discussions has never liked that and would create a ton of paperwork for him. Didn't make much sense to suggest it again though I still think it's the only absolute way.

I canna figure any way around kids logging on and bidding. And it isn't even ALL kids - there is a group that have been on here for years, payments done on their parent's accounts with parent permission and everyone was happy with that arrangement.

But the ones that are computer savvy but short on common sense or respect for their parent's information - I don't see a way around it. It happens on the websites too but there I can almost always catch it with a phone call and a verification of the person's name. It isn't 100% proof though.

I still think the sticky is a good idea for buyers and one for upcoming sellers. If the Seller blog on Aqua Boards would flesh out with the information - that would be wonderful place to automate messages to the Sellers for information that old dawgs here have learned. It would stick it all in one place.

I think it would be a good idea for a Buyers' blog also with the information pertinent to them - and an automated message. Then stick the good stuff in a sticky. Those are about the only suggestions I think could be done by volunteers on AB without creating a world of more work for Barnett - who is working speedily on the revamping of the violation form.

Yeah, there are much much worse things than being called old....want me to name them? :p

AmazonMoosey
04-27-2011, 07:15 PM
Are you serious?

"Compromise" is not even a part of my vocabulary.

I'm going back down to the politics forum where folks actually understand me.

. :evil:[/B]

Understand you or just agree with you? Those two things aren't the same, yah know... lol

HCA, it would be easier to ask Pete to marry you than it would be to ask him to compromise with you. I don't suggest doing either....:p

lotsoffish
04-27-2011, 07:23 PM
It's NOT kids, it's MORONS that is the problem.

I have sold stuff to lots of kids under 18 and I have NEVER been burned by one of them. I would like to see the registration age LOWERED so we had MORE kids getting in to the hobby.

I thought the discussion was about how to deal with retaliatory feed backs?

Why are you folks talking about kids now?

I'm outta here. This threads going nowhere fast. :thumbsdown:

hca75
04-27-2011, 07:32 PM
I DIDNT mean YOU and PETE argueing, thats more ENTERTAINMENT.....I just mean in general... lots of debating going on,but not very many can agree on anything... :angel:
I broke down a few scenerios into catagories.... w/ possible suggestions...mine and those already suggested

KIDS- deadbeat bidders, ect... the ones that BID up, then disappear of the face of the planet w/o paying... So you didnt get paid, so you didnt ship, and they are long gone... no REAL harm done... your not out anything, ( unless of course its TIME sensitive killie eggs...which Id put in the NEXt catagory), what do about them, I say just fill out the breach of sale/ violation forms, give them a neg, and either go to the second highest bidder, or relist... most of these arent gonna come back in the near future after their "buying" spree

PAIN IN THE REAR END bidders... slow to pay,lots of excuses, lots of complaints, they dont make sure they get their box.. whatever.... BIG group of potential problems with this catagory...some avoidable, some not, some I see as just a BASIC personality CONFLICT between buyer and seller....polar opposites that will never agree on anything..

A sticky and automated intruction sheet would DEFINATELY help.. but doesnt guarentee they will FOLLOW or read it. Would help SOME, definatley!!I think Ive walked my share of newer bidders threw things.. and Im pretty new myself.

Banning someone you know your gonna have a potential conflict with is also an option, That one I have done... keeps those personality conflicts from rising up... I say nip it in the BUD before there a problem...

but the possible retalitory feedback is largest in this group... and THAT is the problem we need to find a solution for... a panel, a revamped form?? Or do we start STICKING to auction rules, that no contact /payment arragements in 7 days cancels it out??? That would weed out SOME of the potential problems...

SCAMMERS- these are the ones that BID, win, and some even promptly pay up. and then claim they NEVER got their stuff... or that it was all DOA, ect... varying forms of the scam, trying to get free stuff at the sellers expense. Yes this group will leave neg feedbacks also... but I see this one, on the feedback side anyway, as more CLEAR CUT, easier to sort threw... ( but a PAIN for the seller).. Proper documentaion will prove they got their stuff... ect... and if they dont have pictures of dead fish that match the picts of auction fish... then its pretty obvious whats going on... so I feel these types of NEGATIVES are definately retalitory, and need to be removed, either by a new form, or panel, or whatever...
Now beth, brought up the point of a dig camera... and some people MIGHT not have one... TRUE... MOST people DO, but some DONT.. just like MOST people have cell phones, and I dont, I hate em... LOL... ok so someone bids, wins, pays, and gets a box DOA... but cant PROVE they are DOA... its not fair, it really ISNT... but to me this is kinda common SENCE 101... the guarentee says to send a clear dig pict ect... if ya dont have a dig camera, and you get DOA's your OUT OF LUCK... as you cant provide the PROOF... they KNEW they didnt have a camera BEFORE they bid, I say this one is ON them...
THe seller DOESNt know if your scamming them or NOT... I feel its the BUYERS responcibility to provide proof of doa... I think these type of issues need to be put in the STICKYS and automated messages...

Just my 2 cents... Holly

hca75
04-27-2011, 07:34 PM
Marry???? I sure do NOT think so... that word isnt currently in MY vocabulary...:p

AmazonMoosey
04-27-2011, 07:36 PM
if there was some proof of age, I'd bet EASILY 50% of the shenanagins on AB are caused by kids and teenies attracted to shiny & expensive things like fish...the other 50% of the scams and problems are caused by sexually starved looozars who live beyond thier means (and NO doubt have a plethora of expensive and useless vices like collecting fish, star wars action figures, or spend hours on X-Box, et)


And it isn't even ALL kids - there is a group that have been on here for years, payments done on their parent's accounts with parent permission and everyone was happy with that arrangement.



It's NOT kids, it's MORONS that is the problem.

I have sold stuff to lots of kids under 18 and I have NEVER been burned by one of them. I would like to see the registration age LOWERED so we had MORE kids getting in to the hobby.

I thought the discussion was about how to deal with retaliatory feed backs?
[/B]

From what I gather from Doc's posts - he feels a majority of the retaliatory feedback, charlatan bidders comes from kids/teens. I'm pretty sure I could do a search of the forums and find where you Pete, have also said something similar before in the not so far past. Actual teens that are avid about fish? There's not a person here that wants to curtail that. Who wouldn't want to have more Bluegreen's and more Paree's in their lives as fish keepers? Even though both are now grown and adults - both still are active in fish keeping.

That doesn't negate Doc's statement though, or yours statement Pete, on another thread about how it would be summer soon with all the kids out messing around (your post that is) on the forums.

So it still is about retaliatory feedback. So what's your suggestion besides a feedback panel of old ladies? I know you have another one besides that one.

beth
04-27-2011, 10:13 PM
I am old. And that means old enough to know I would never want to be on some unpaid panel who's sole purpose is to deal with at least one moron in every dispute, sometimes two. I would seriously question the competency of someone who would be willing...

If it is sooooo very bad that the other party deserves a negative, then wait until there is no time for them to respond.

Too busy? Then I guess it wasn't all that bad now was it?

I have seen people say this is cowardly but there is a LOT to be said for it. It's going to be a good month or so after things went hopelessly sour. That scathing negative you want to write while you are angry is probably not the same thing you would write a month later when you have cooled off.

Think of it like the waiting period to buy a handgun. A chance to think things over and gain perspective. Maybe it only deserves a neutral or maybe that neutral becomes a negative. But at least it wasn't done in a moment of anger.

If you have tried to resolve the situation, filed breach of sale and whatever, then you have done your part to notify Mark. If the majority are following the advised procedure, he is not going to need a bunch of negatives showing up for the person to be brought to his attention.

Yes, I am back to 'file breach of sale'. If something this simple doesn't work there is no hope for something more complicated. Remember, if you file breach of sale twice, the person is supposed to be suspended for 30 days. If they are suspended they cannot give you retaliatory feedback. But let's assume they don't get suspended...

Yes, there are a few few high profile bad bidders but they are a teeny tiny minority. Most really are just morons. There are a few sellers who set out with bad intentions but again, most who have problems are just morons.

Think about how much time it takes to make a note on whatever calendar you use. Just a quick "Leave FB for moron". Wow, a full minute if you have to find a pen. Surely that expensive phone has an alarm function.

Do you have an idea of how much time you are going to spend disputing a negative?

A couple of weeks ago I had a lady buy something then change her mind. Instead of simply canceling she called the bank and claimed unauthorized charges. She hadn't even received it yet, for all she knew I was tossing gold coins in boxes. Yes, a moron. I didn't really care about the small amount of money but I wanted to find out what was involved and what it takes to win. You know, in case I had the opportunity in the future to deal with a bigger moron. So I upload all my evidence and since I didn't feel like waiting out the 30 days, I called PayPal. A nice lady looked at my evidence, said I was all set and released my $18.

This was an open and shut case, the only way I could have lost is if I didn't bother trying. And yet it STILL took me a couple of hours.

Leaving yourself a note then going back and giving feedback will be a few minutes total. Conclusively proving you are not the moron in a dispute could be measured in hours. And even then you are not guaranteed a win.

If it's a serious situation and needs special attention send Mark an email. He does read them, he does act on them when needed.

I know this work-around isn't as morally satisfying but it gets the job done.

AmazonMoosey
04-28-2011, 06:30 AM
I am old. And that means old enough to know I would never want to be on some unpaid panel who's sole purpose is to deal with at least one moron in every dispute, sometimes two. I would seriously question the competency of someone who would be willing...

And that, is why "old" ladies have no desire to be on the feedback panel. Most have spent many a year already cleaning up messes for others, of others. I canna think of a single one who wakes up and thinks "Damn, I sure miss cleaning up after others. I sure hope someone comes and makes a big mess so I can clean it up."

When the talk got to a panel of 3, ideas came to my mind who I think would make good panel people.

Goober, Doc and Yeahbut, and UncleDare. Almost forgot one, I did.

Each of them sees the world differently than others do and have, from on the boards of what I have seen of them, listen at least, to the other person before they tell them how it is. None of them feel the need to "prove themselves" to anyone.

But you know Pete, that was the second nicest thing you have ever said about me. In your way, you said you thought I could be fair and honest enough to be on the panel. Thanx - that was real nice of you to say.

Okay, now we can go back to throwing zingers at each other before you start getting all mushy again and blowing snot in your cream of wheat.

As Always (just cuz I know you hate it so damn much)

Gail

DLW777
04-28-2011, 09:58 AM
So, What's the plan then?

AmazonMoosey
04-28-2011, 11:05 AM
So, What's the plan then?

There isn't one from what I see.

If you kept track of each of the messages and where it stood you will see there is no majority of the few participants on any of it. (If I left out some, it wasn't intentional - I was getting lost on who was now where)


Feedback Panel of 12 to 20 – rotating – Doc, Maybe Barnett

Feedback Panel of 3 – Lotsoffish, Maybe Barnett

Feedback Panel with fish information particular to the species – Onesockshort

Feedback Panel of 3 that are not of the same cliques – Onesockshort, HCA

Poll Panel – Doc

Coin Toss – Onesockshort

Sticky Notes – Onesockshort, AmazonMoosey, HCA


Neg to Neutral both ways instead of just up – Onesockshort

Sellers post feedback first – Chocoplaty

Keep system as it is – RMC – I think – or maybe he was just commenting.

Combination of suggestions (”use the feedback area where "plaintiff" and/or "defendant" is notified of the new Negative and summoned to appear on the feedback forum to submit proof of claim (evidence in support of their negative or innocence or whatever)” (sorry Doc, couldn’t figure out how to shorten the idea) – Doc


Use of Stickys and Blogs for Sellers and Users– AmazonMoosey, maybe Onesockshort, HCA

Revamping the Violation Report – Barnett, AmazonMoosey, HCA

Feedback Panel of Older Women – Lotsoffish, HCA


Those are the ones I can find that have made suggestions or tried to help flesh out anything. Beth and Barnett helped point out pitfalls of certain scenarios.

8 people out of ALL the buyers and ALL the Sellers put in any input. What is that - less than .00000001% of the total group?

hca75
04-28-2011, 11:31 AM
8 people out of ALL the buyers and ALL the Sellers put in any input. What is that - less than .00000001% of the total group?

Yeah, there isnt much agreeing, or very many giving any ideas, or even very many voicing thier ideas on what they think could help.

I believe we need many more to stick their neck out, and voice their opinions... until then, I feel its too small of a number voicing their opinions For Mark to go to the trouble of making changes.... so SPEAK UP.... will ya.... please???? :)

as for the old woman..... We all know mom's rule...:p, anyone who has gotten a couple kids to adulthood, HAD to learn how to sort threw some BS...so Pete does have a point there... but:gickle: I just think its funny...

I'm for just about any positive change where its better than it is now, and their isnt possible legal ramifications for making a judgement call.

DLW777
04-28-2011, 11:49 AM
Thanks for the round up. I was just wondering if a consensus was reached. I agree with the feedback panel but only on cut and dry cases of no payment or no shipment. Otherwise, there is too much room for judgement calls and that can get ugly.

I think the only qualification for the panel should be if they have been an AB member for a year or more and it would be great if they were both a buyer and a seller.

There, that is my 2 cents for what it is worth.


P.S. And one should be a man betweent 30-40 and the other should be 2 women between 40-60. Then the 2 women can overrule the younger man if needed. :secret2:

AmazonMoosey
04-28-2011, 12:06 PM
I think the only qualification for the panel should be if they have been an AB member for a year or more and it would be great if they were both a buyer and a seller.



[B]Do you mean "AB" as in AquaBid or in "AB" as Aquaboards and/or both? I am assuming you mean the auction side.

Feedback Panel of 12 to 20 – rotating – Doc, Maybe Barnett

Feedback Panel of 3 – Lotsoffish, Maybe Barnett, DLW777

Feedback Panel with fish information particular to the species – Onesockshort

Feedback Panel of 3 that are not of the same cliques – Onesockshort, HCA

Poll Panel – Doc

Coin Toss – Onesockshort

Sticky Notes – Onesockshort, AmazonMoosey, HCA


Neg to Neutral both ways instead of just up – Onesockshort

Sellers post feedback first – Chocoplaty

Keep system as it is – RMC – I think – or maybe he was just commenting.

Combination of suggestions (”use the feedback area where "plaintiff" and/or "defendant" is notified of the new Negative and summoned to appear on the feedback forum to submit proof of claim (evidence in support of their negative or innocence or whatever)” (sorry Doc, couldn’t figure out how to shorten the idea) – Doc


Use of Stickys and Blogs for Sellers and Users– AmazonMoosey, maybe Onesockshort, HCA

Revamping the Violation Report – Barnett, AmazonMoosey, HCA

Feedback Panel of Older Women – Lotsoffish

There's 9 inputs.

Edited to add.... it would be easier if people would just copy the choices or add a new suggestion, add themselves to which ever ones they want and post it. Maybe that way, the discussions if any could continue but a count of what people think they want could grow.

lotsoffish
04-28-2011, 12:44 PM
And that, is why "old" ladies have no desire to be on the feedback panel. Most have spent many a year already cleaning up messes for others, of others. I canna think of a single one who wakes up and thinks "Damn, I sure miss cleaning up after others. I sure hope someone comes and makes a big mess so I can clean it up."

When the talk got to a panel of 3, ideas came to my mind who I think would make good panel people.

Goober, Doc and Yeahbut, and UncleDare. Almost forgot one, I did.


Gail

Ya well, just like everything else in life, every ones milling around yapping about idea's but nothings getting implemented. I thought about this for a good 10 minutes before coming up with this 3 panel idea. It's SIMPLE, easily manageable, and I STILL think Barnett outta try it. Make them like "Supreme Court" judges. He gets to think about who he picks and then those 3 get to be on the panel till they either retire, die, or Barnett does away with the whole idea cuz unforeseen issues arise that end up showing him that my idea SUCKS and I am an idiot. :evil:

I sell WAY to much and talk to way to many hobbyists around here to ever be on this panel and honestly I don't have nearly enough patients to judge these types of things logically, BUT I am GREAT at talking folks (like Beth) into doing crap they know they don't want to do, SO if Barnett wants to give this idea a try I think he outta pick his panel and then have ME talk to those folks about doing it before he does. :evil:

I am TIRED of folks choosing to do nothing rather than "running something up the flag pole to see if it fly's" so as far as I am concerned I am just about done with this thread. :thumbsdown:

lotsoffish
04-28-2011, 12:51 PM
But you know Pete, that was the second nicest thing you have ever said about me. In your way, you said you thought I could be fair and honest enough to be on the panel. Thanx - that was real nice of you to say.

Okay, now we can go back to throwing zingers at each other before you start getting all mushy again and blowing snot in your cream of wheat.

As Always (just cuz I know you hate it so damn much)

Gail

Actually Moosey, I have always thought that you were a very intelligent person with a fairly level head on your shoulders.

I think you would be perfect for a job like that panel AS LONG AS YOU DIDN'T start asking MORONS what they thought of certain situations you were trying to sort out.
LOL! (That always seems to be your down fall, from what I have observed of you the past decade or so). :evil:

* See post # 72 for a good example of this. :thumbsdown:

Swampy
04-28-2011, 02:20 PM
Pete - I'm think'in that she asks these morons for opinions so she will know what to disregard. :gickle:

Goober
04-28-2011, 02:21 PM
Goober, Doc and Yeahbut, and UncleDare.

Thank you Ms. Moosey for the compliment !

The way I see it however , is that the whole deal is Slappy's , ummm... make that Spanky's , problem .
I wouldn't touch it with a 10 foot pole .
If anyone has a vested interest in keeping the rank and file happy , it's Spanky .

AmazonMoosey
04-28-2011, 03:07 PM
@Goober - you are welcome and it was sincerely meant. There are others but the 4 of you come up first. Your personal input around here is sorely missed, Goober and I don't think just from me.

Sides - I am gonna have some wonderful pics of pups soon and will make sure to put "PUPS" in the title as you said years ago to do..

@Pete - My only downfall on this is wanting more than 9 inputs for a few hundred, if not thousands of participants. laughing

I mean GEEZ - even Thomas Jefferson would start howling at a panel of 3 or 15 affecting his feedback, if he didn't at least get a say in whether it was to be implemented!

Your latest compliment on thinking I am very intelligent plus level headed, besides being good at the panel, touches me.

But not even enough to change my mind. My answer on that is NO.

It is too much like repeating history from the past. Frankly, I have no desire to be slam bammed thank you ma'am all over the forums again because some pie eyed hole is having a hissy. I can make enemies on my own just fine and dandy without any help of a title.

I don't think you can talk Beth into doing it - at least I hope not. Now hear me out before you rant on me.

If this does come down to a panel of 3 making judgement calls, then I want people who can stand on their own two feet and NOT BE TALKED INTO ANYTHING by a power seller, heavy wallet buyer or even a friend.

No Beth, I am not saying you would capitulate under any conditions - I just don't want people that can be lobbied if Barnett goes with the feedback panel.

As far as participating or sitting on the benches, I gave three areas where I would gladly help.

1. Working with a group to collect solid helpful information for Sellers,
2. another one for Bidders to train/educate/edify. And
3. on the revamping of the violation report.

The first two are things I know we can do right now without having to go through Barnett. Onesockshort suggested it and I think it's a great suggestion to have it gathered as a comprehensive sticky.

So why don't YOU make the personal choice to help on that? You have oodles of knowledge on Selling here and for the most part, have kept your nose clean as a Seller. Well?

@Swamps - Ha! I honestly thought people would start voting if it was more tabulated. My bad - even you didn't vote on any of it!:nahnah:

All my filters are cleaned and redone while we bantered over this. It was good to have something to think about while my hands were squishing out fishy stuff! If someone needs/wants my help or input, they know where to find me.

Right between a rock and a hard place! :ciao:

hca75
04-28-2011, 03:07 PM
I have found a few more, updated the list.... and my votes... all updates in blue... :D


Feedback Panel of 12 to 20 – rotating – Doc, Maybe Barnett

Feedback Panel of 3 – Lotsoffish, Maybe Barnett, DLW777

Feedback Panel with fish information particular to the species – Onesockshort

Feedback Panel of 3 that are not of the same cliques – Onesockshort, HCA( only if no legal liability)

Poll Panel – Doc

Coin Toss – Onesockshort

Sticky Notes – Onesockshort, AmazonMoosey, HCA ( see comments below)

Neg to Neutral both ways instead of just up – Onesockshort, HCA ( With some things I can see this being beneficial- like EGGS..)

Sellers post feedback first – Chocoplaty

Keep system as it is – RMC – I think – or maybe he was just commenting.

Combination of suggestions (”use the feedback area where "plaintiff" and/or "defendant" is notified of the new Negative and summoned to appear on the feedback forum to submit proof of claim (evidence in support of their negative or innocence or whatever)” (sorry Doc, couldn’t figure out how to shorten the idea) – Doc


Use of Stickys and Blogs for Sellers and Users– AmazonMoosey, maybe Onesockshort, HCA-
THIS ONE I think we need no matter what happens with the rest as it would alert newbys and " somewhat experienced " sellers and buyers alike to things they need to be watchful for..their responcibilities, ect.... each box is differant with tons of variables...
And I VOTE for PETE to write them up.. he's got the experience, deals with a much larger population of buyers,and he has a wonderful NO NONSENCE, NON wordy ( unless its an auction...LOL ) , SIMPLE to understand writing style...everyone can understand what he says, if they are literate. THEN have a few other "seasoned " shippers buyers and board veterans ( like YEAH BUT) REVIEW it... because several differing view points is GOOD, as we all see things from DIFFERANT angles, and someone might pick up on an important but easily overlooked factoid...

Revamping the Violation Report – Barnett, AmazonMoosey, HCA

Feedback Panel of Older Women – Lotsoffish

USING the forms we already have/ but more efficently, - HCA, Beth...( As you can see I think a variety of resources has benefits)

Waiting till last min to neg a looser- BETH
( this one i see problems with as they can continue their free for all for 6 wks before anyones the wiser to it, meaning they can get many buyers)

Even when we have a VARIETY of resources, I think they need to be SIMPLE, to many rules gets confusing, hard to manage, and things start looking like you need to be a lawyer to understand them. As Beth pointed out, there are some that ENGLISH is their 2nd language,( Ive dealt with a few) as Pete and Moosey pointed out, there are several RESPONCIBLE kids and teens who are HONEST hobbyist. With that taken into cosideration, Make the rules & forms simple enough that an average 16 year old kid can understand / grasp/ and USE them.

I dont have the experience that alot of you have with breeding/ shipping / or even buying... but I have been around here long enough to see alot of potential problems to the current system, and see others get screwed over. I've learned ALOT from many of your years of experience , and try to pass on that knowlege to others. i think This is a GREAT place... and want to help improve it. Holly

beth
04-28-2011, 03:40 PM
Waiting till last min to neg a looser- BETH
(this one i see problems with as they can continue their free for all for 6 wks before anyones the wiser to it, meaning they can get many buyers)

This does not have the full context.

What I said was that if you have tried to resolve the situation, filed breach of sale and whatever, then you have done your part to notify Mark. If the majority are following the advised procedure, he is not going to need a bunch of negatives showing up for the person to be brought to his attention.

I also said remember, if you file breach of sale twice, the person is supposed to be suspended for 30 days. If they are suspended they cannot give you retaliatory feedback.

And I even said that if it's a serious situation and needs special attention send Mark an email. He does read them, he does act on them when needed.

What I have NOT said was do absolutely nothing and just wait it out.

Since Mark started approving users before they can bid, the frequency of users who bid on auctions without intent to pay has dropped to very low levels. I do not agree that one of these users would have a free for all for 6 weeks. If that does happen I would really like to know why not even one seller bothered to file breach of sale.

I am done with this. It's not a democracy.

hca75
04-28-2011, 04:22 PM
Beth... i just tried to shorten it, not take it out of context,,, if i upset you, im sorry, that was not my intentions

Moosey... i agree with those that cant be lobbied, if thats the route this goes

Id really like to hear from some others...

BallAquatics
04-28-2011, 05:02 PM
Thinking more on the lines of revamping the report a violation form. May require this filled out and processes before a negative feedback can be posted. Making a place where both parties can see all communications. You would have to use this section for all replies.

Put me down for the "Revamping the Report A Violation Form".

Just change "May require this filled out and processes before a negative feedback can be posted." to "Would require this filled out and processes before a negative feedback can be posted."

Seems like a very simple way to put a damper on Retaliatory Feedback & Waiting till the Last Min to Post Negative feedback.

Dennis

hca75
04-28-2011, 05:18 PM
UPDATE- now have 10 participants...

Feedback Panel of 12 to 20 – rotating – Doc, Maybe Barnett (2)

Feedback Panel of 3 – Lotsoffish, Maybe Barnett, DLW777 (3)

Feedback Panel with fish information particular to the species – Onesockshort (1)

Feedback Panel of 3 that are not of the same cliques – Onesockshort, HCA( only if no legal liability) (1.5)

Poll Panel – Doc (1)

Coin Toss – Onesockshort (1)

Sticky Notes – Onesockshort, AmazonMoosey, HCA ( see comments below)(3)

Neg to Neutral both ways instead of just up – Onesockshort, HCA ( With some things I can see this being beneficial- like EGGS..)(2)

Sellers post feedback first – Chocoplaty(1)

Keep system as it is – RMC – I think – or maybe he was just commenting.(1)

Combination of suggestions (”use the feedback area where "plaintiff" and/or "defendant" is notified of the new Negative and summoned to appear on the feedback forum to submit proof of claim (evidence in support of their negative or innocence or whatever)” (sorry Doc, couldn’t figure out how to shorten the idea) – Doc


Use of Stickys and Blogs for Sellers and Users– AmazonMoosey, maybe Onesockshort, HCA- (3)
THIS ONE I think we need no matter what happens with the rest as it would alert newbys and " somewhat experienced " sellers and buyers alike to things they need to be watchful for..their responcibilities, ect.... each box is differant with tons of variables...
And I VOTE for PETE to write them up.. he's got the experience, deals with a much larger population of buyers,and he has a wonderful NO NONSENCE, NON wordy ( unless its an auction...LOL ) , SIMPLE to understand writing style...everyone can understand what he says, if they are literate. THEN have a few other "seasoned " shippers buyers and board veterans ( like YEAH BUT) REVIEW it... because several differing view points is GOOD, as we all see things from DIFFERANT angles, and someone might pick up on an important but easily overlooked factoid...

Revamping the Violation Report – Barnett, AmazonMoosey, HCA, Ball Aquatics (4)

Feedback Panel of Older Women – Lotsoffish (1)

doctorgori
04-28-2011, 07:14 PM
Disclaimer:
yes I'm just tossing $hlt towards the wall and see if it sticks, but....

At some point, some disputes eventually simply require "human" judgment...
...some disputes will never be cut and dry, and if we let this thing just remain status quo, it ain't gonna just affect Mark, it weakens the entire barter/exchange venue...
(sure its been this way for a while and its likewise been WEAKENING for a while; personally most feedback don't mean jack $hlt to me anymore)

lets face it: we basically buying goods sight unseen and that leaves a lot of waggle for potential unsatifactory crap to happen .... we are talking money and loss here and we will always need humans to "judge" disputes...
I still vote/lean towards a web poll that can "override" a buyer/sellers feedback

RMC
04-28-2011, 08:42 PM
Woulda, coulda, shoulda...........

Of the thousands of transactions that have taken place on AquaBid I would have to say that anyone that has had bad luck is part of a very tiny minority. Over the years of listening/reading about the woes of buyers and sellers, it's the same old stories where somebody bid on something too good to be true, retalitory feedback, impatience, a buyer expecting the world for the few bucks they spent, etc, etc.

If you think you're going to make big bucks in this hobby then you need a reality check.
If you think once you pay a seller for the goods your responsibility is over then you need a reality check.
If fish die after you receive them then there is a good chance you killed them, not the seller.
If someone can't pay after winning the bid there may be a valid reason..... s hit happens.
If someone can't ship right away there may be a valid reason...... s hit happens.

I can see Mark changing the verbage on some of the rules of engagement but I can't see revamping the whole system for the sake of the few that can't seem to have pleasant transactions. Chances are no matter how much you change the system, the same people will still have issues....... s hit happens.

If folks would quit trying to make a fast buck or get something for nothing and just enjoy this for what it really is (A HOBBY), they just might find out how much fun they're missing.

I think what this forum really needs is a good old fashioned FlameFest.

I miss Airstoned

:king:

Goober
04-28-2011, 08:53 PM
It's called the "Nanny-ization" of America .

RMC
04-28-2011, 09:03 PM
Thanks.......... a mental image of Barnett in a nanny outfit really wasn't what I needed just before going to bed.

lotsoffish
04-28-2011, 10:13 PM
Thanks.......... a mental image of Barnett in a nanny outfit really wasn't what I needed just before going to bed.


I don't think he was referring to Barnett. I could be wrong but I think he means all the users that can't seem to deal with these simple transactions.

lotsoffish
04-28-2011, 10:21 PM
Thinking more on the lines of revamping the report a violation form. May require this filled out and processes before a negative feedback can be posted. Making a place where both parties can see all communications. You would have to use this section for all replies.

This actually seems like it might be a good idea. It would at least prevent some nut case that never bothered to reply to anyone, regarding anything, from giving anyone a negative feed back.

Those are definitely ALWAYS undeserved.

DLW777
04-29-2011, 09:07 AM
I think neging someone at the last minute-AFTER you have tried everything you can to resolve it, has its merits.

AmazonMoosey
04-29-2011, 09:36 AM
Thanks.......... a mental image of Barnett in a nanny outfit really wasn't what I needed just before going to bed.

How about now that you are awake?

I don't think any of us would like our individual auctions to fall under nanny state. The individual personalities of our auctions is what is some of the appeal of AB. I think we all agree we just want the stupidity of retaliatory negs removed as much as possible.


DLW, it looks like the consensus you were looking for is for the revamping of the violation report. I think the tips and such Sellers and Buyers have learned over the years, stuck into a sticky for each has merit. I think it would do well to help buyers and sellers protect themselves and to know more what to expect. Who knows? Maybe the timing isn't right now but further down the road.


There are a few of the more prominent Sellers that use the neg at the last minute and it works for them. I have used it - find it a pain to remember to do - but it served its purpose.

lotsoffish
04-29-2011, 11:48 AM
There are a few of the more prominent Sellers that use the neg at the last minute and it works for them. I have used it - find it a pain to remember to do - but it served its purpose.

That's not a very "manly" way of doing things. Who does it that way? RMC? :evil:

It's like hitting a guy when you know he's not looking and he's not going to be able to hit you back.

That might work for ladies but I think some of us need a better solution to the problem than that.

hca75
04-29-2011, 12:48 PM
Well So far < it seems that those that have spoke up are for the revamped form... Or atleast not against it... I say thats a great start!!

I would still like to see some stickys, or blogs... as would a few others.... for buyers and sellers... SO PETE, what do you think about writing them up?? Youve got the experience... Cant think of a better person for the JOB... Whatcha say????? And maybe have a few proposed " panelists" do the editing???? ( If you'd be willing to volenteer for such a job that is???

AmazonMoosey
04-29-2011, 01:10 PM
That's not a very "manly" way of doing things. Who does it that way? RMC? :evil:

It's like hitting a guy when you know he's not looking and he's not going to be able to hit you back.


Ah yes, the old "he hit me back first!" argument. :p Why does it matter to you now, "who" does it ...lol...

It is/was/still a way that Seller found to work within the current system, yet around (in your words) a moron who was too (in your words) lazy to do their part of a deal correctly, or one just bent on making trouble.

Griton
04-30-2011, 07:52 AM
My '0' Cents (Sense). I've been trying really hard to follow all of this and contribute but truthfully, it's too many words going in too many directions for my damaged brain to keep up with and make sense of! Then again, if you can get it to a place that I understand it, then just about anyone should be able to.

As a buyer only, I didn't think it affected me that much then realized of course it does since I use feedback to make a final decision about a seller if I don't know them from the forum etc. It doesn't bother me if a seller has a few negs because everyone can go through some rough spots. I look to see how long ago they were and investigate the person who left them. So far I haven't had a single bad experience buying through AB but my little system sure isn't foolproof.

So if you want me, I will volunteer for whatever I could be useful at. I do qualify for the 'old woman' part but nobody has mentioned 'brain damaged' yet as a criteria! Plus being terminally nice, I might balance out someone who is chronically mean and I haven't been around long enough to have strong opinions or affiliations with anyone. Just sayin!