posted on June 25, 2001 10:12:40 PM new
I think PayPal has incredible disregard for their customers' privacy. I plan to complain to the Better Business Bureau about this (Incidentally, PayPal has an unsatisfactory rating with the BBB, their lowest rating).
posted on June 25, 2001 10:41:33 PM new
Please forgive my ignorance, but I do not understand how this information would be useful to anyone in the way PayPal is claiming it will. Putting the privacy issues aside for a moment, consider this as an example...If this system had been in place last fall, how would it have been viewed by buyers considering making a purchase from GameTek...Do you think this information would have made potential buyers more or less comfortable making a purchase? Would it have led to an increase in sales or a decrease? Considering what we now know about this company, is this how it is suppose to work??
posted on June 25, 2001 11:36:39 PM newloggiaI plan to complain to the Better Business Bureau about this
That's funny. You can complain to the BBB if you feel the font they use on their web page is offensive if you wish. What surprises me is filing complaints when you don't have an account.
If you have an account forgive my assumption loggia, but I'd find it rather really strange since you should make countless posts warning and advising against PayPal.
For me the transaction numbers aren't an issue, I don't know of a single auction site that doesn't supply more information on my activity so I can hardly claim to be offended.
posted on June 26, 2001 03:58:05 AM new
hm. so far, i don't really get what all the fuss is about. okay, so someone wants to pay me via paypal and when they do, they can see how long i've had the account, how many unique verified users i've had transactions with. :shrug:
to me it sounds a bit like ebay's feedback system, but without much usefulness. so i want to buy something from someone, and i go and see they've had xxx transactions from unique verified users, and that they started their account on xx/xx/xx. doesn't tell me much, doesn't help me much. even if it told how many unique users the person had conducted transactions with, which would make it slightly more useful, that still doesn't particularly make me feel better or worse. i don't get it.
damon,
how or when is this info supposed to come up? when someone goes to their pp account and pays someone, or you go there and enter the user id and check?
posted on June 26, 2001 06:46:35 AM newUaru writes:What surprises me is filing complaints when you don't have an account.
If you have an account forgive my assumption loggia, but I'd find it rather really strange since you should make countless posts warning and advising against PayPal.
Uh, what in blazes are you talking about? I've had an account since the beginning...
Sorry if your PayPal sources couldn't find my account...
posted on June 26, 2001 08:38:59 AM new
Telling the Better Business Bureau won't goad PayPal into acting appropriately. They have no regulatory authority. Instead, go here to file a complaint where it will get some action by someone bigger than they are:
What PayPal is doing is likely illegal and the FTC are just the folks that you should be complaining to. Please take five minutes out of your busy day to file your complaint at the address above.
posted on June 26, 2001 09:01:33 AM new
I find it rather amusing how many people will continue to VOLUNTARILY use something and #*!@ when they don't like something trivial about it and not move on.
posted on June 26, 2001 09:07:21 AM new
Okay, I am not a seller or a PayPal member, verified or otherwise, but something about this strikes me (besides the privacy issues), and that is that this numeric listing, added to the "Verification" thing, has subtle implications (at least it would for me).
One: that just being a PP member alone isn't a sign of safety for the other party in a PP transaction, that this Verification step is needed to make the user seem "safer" (my word, but I don't know what other purpose showing a Verified icon would serve).
Two: that this new information is something important too; i.e. that higher numbers mean something better and "thus" lower numbers perhaps seem riskier.
Credit cards seem to have more inherent safety in terms of the seller being able to swipe the buyer's card, and either get a charge (seller is being paid) or a refusal (seller won't get paid). Whereas PP seems to be adding first one layer and then two layers of things that (to me) would imply, "this user is safer" vs. "well, this user maybe isn't so safe," implying that the onus is on the users to "sense" these differences between users.
Of course, the offline CC world has a version of this too, with regular, "Gold," and "Platinum" cards, which with my basic buyer's understanding of credit cards, is that while offering more benefits to the holder, is otherwise little more than a status symbol in the sense that any card, no matter its level, will either be accepted or refused by the CC company when a charge is attempted.
So maybe I'm contradicting myself, and it's all in my opinion, from what I understand; but my point is that it all makes me wonder more, and would make me feel more assured about individual users (perhaps, if I fully understood what the number and verification mean) but less assured about the overall system.
In other words, observing this one from a distance, I don't understand what purpose this number is really supposed to serve.
posted on June 26, 2001 09:21:52 AM new
PayPal's not the only guilty party here, but methinks the practice of stoking buyer fear or uncertainty for some marketing purpose will just end up hurting everyone.
It'd be like airlines taking out ads to criticize each others' safety. Would people still fly?
posted on June 26, 2001 10:05:12 AM new
On the use of checks vs. credit cards vs. direct bill authorization, IMO....
Although checks do list account information on them, of course, the check represents a single authorization for the seller's bank to request that one specified amount of money from my bank, to be withdrawn from my account. Similar to CCs, the bank either authorizes it or it does not, but unfortunately for sellers, any rejection will come after the purchase was already made.
Other access means, such as authorizing direct bill or for PayPal to have direct access, represent what I would call "blanket authorization" to access an account, and more directly at that. Yes, there are rules and specifications that make it less than "blanket," but it is more complicated to understand and be assured about than the single-authorization, intermediary-heavy system that an individual check has, IMO. It also does not change the chance of an NSF rejection of the check. It does have some benefits of simplification for the buyer, but also represents multiple parties having much more direct access to buyer's account, rather than the one party (the buyer's bank acting as an intermediary).
Credit cards represent, in most basic terms, a "yes" or "no" system: either the charge attempt is accepted by the CC, or it is not, and the feedback to the seller is immediate and seemingly more binding.
From that standpoint, I tend to feel checks and CCs are safer than any direct authorizations.
Checks do, of course, list more personal information directly on them, however, while OTOH, credit card companies can accumulate a lot of personal/purchase information about you.
computerboy: Why shouldn't that get people's "undies in a bundle" (as you put it) as well, in terms of credit cards and/or bureaus allowing that information to be too readily available? In my opinion, they should not be selling or otherwise distributing that information either, unless under court order to do so. Seems to me that one of the big three U.S. credit bureaus got ruled against in a case of them distributing too much information (even more than usual), but unfortunately, I don't remember which one, only that it was either a Supreme Court or New York court case over a year ago.
Yes, it happens a lot offline, but it is interesting that online practices, under more of an immediate, rapid-response microscope (to mix metaphors), are illuminating similar practices offline. Indeed, it was spam and DoubleClick that helped pull me into finding out what was going on offline as well.
----
What's being done in the name of direct marketing nowadays is crazy.
The above are all just my opinions, except where I cite facts as such.
Oh, I am not dc9a320 anywhere except AW. Any others are not me.
Is eBay is changing from a world bazaar into a bizarre world?
[ edited by dc9a320 on Jun 26, 2001 10:09 AM ]
posted on June 26, 2001 10:21:15 AM new
Damon..a few questions I would like an answer to, please.
1)if the seller is unverified do the number of unique transactions with verified users still show up?
2)how does the number of unique VERIFIED users one has transacted with lend an air of safety as opposed to how many unique TOTAL transactions one has done?
In other words....if a seller has conducted transactions with 500 unique paypal users, all of whom are unverified and another seller has conducted transactions with 500 unique paypal users all of whom are verified..how does it make any difference to a potential customer as to how safe it is to deal with EITHER of these two sellers?
It is possible a potential customer may want the SELLER to be verified (in a mistaken notion that paypal's verification will somehow provide a greater chance of a "safe" transaction) because the buyer wants to judge the SELLER'S legitimacy. But the verification or non-verification of prior CUSTOMERS of the seller gives no information as to the SELLER'S legitimacy and the safety of dealing with him.
Using an analogy...it doesn't matter to my potential ebay customers how many of my prior customers are now NARUed as that number tells him absolutely NOTHING about whether I will scam him or not.
The same thing holds true with this new "feature" of paypal...the number of verified users a seller has done business with says absolutely NOTHING about whether it is safe to deal with this seller...while the number of TOTAL transactions could possibly give some feeling about how safe it is to deal with a seller
"1)if the seller is unverified do the number of unique transactions with verified users still show up?
No. The number only counts when the transactions occur between verified members.
2)how does the number of unique VERIFIED users one has transacted with lend an air of safety as opposed to how many unique TOTAL transactions one has done?
This is just a guide, much as traditional feedback is used, to help the users gauge potential risk. It is not an endorsement of the party...just an indicator of how many users that they have dealt with that have not had an issue.
The total number of transactions will not be released (while a great idea, it would violate many issues relative to privacy).
posted on June 26, 2001 11:14:31 AM new
Really this is has nothing to do with helping the buyer or the seller, the more I've thought about it the only people to benefit is PayPal.
What purpose could this serve other than the seller making it so that they will only accept funds from verified accounts. Of course PayPal has tried to push this with some of their seller protection stuff. But as many people like to collect feedback(I could care less) now that they have a another number to inflate so I will only deal with verified customers their by helping PayPal harvest more bank account information and I get another mark on my account.
If you are a verified account it allows PayPal to by pass the credit card companies all together. If there is a problem with a transaction and a CC is used PayPal has a charge back from the CC company looming over there head. If they have your bank account they can just reverse the monies and hope that the person will not also do a charge back. As PayPal is the merchant the more charge backs you have the more money it costs you to clear the transactions. Now I'm sure that they have the best clearing rate in the industry, but I doubt that they can beat the charge back fee that the CC companies charge the merchant, maybe so.
So really every bank account number they have can save them on charge back fees. Also a charge back will cost PayPal 15 dollars that they will pass along to you that you can't recoup. I have none of this persons info, PayPal process the charge and if the card is lost or stolen or something is wrong they pass that back on us, does that seem right? Once they charge back a bank account that is pretty much it, it's there and you can't do anything about it, if they were to charge back a CC they could be in line for another charge back.
Once PayPal has your bank account the more in control they are, it is next to impossible to stop a ACH debit to your bank account. Also with no threat of a CC company charge back there is no real pressure on PayPal to do anything but debit a bank account and reverse the charge if there is a problem. Once again the "shift of power" is to the buyer and not the seller, if you can reverse a transaction without worry then how much do you investigate the problem?
I think what has happened is that everybody has become side tracked with their little box and the information that it contains and not what it's true purpose is, that being to pressure us, to pressure our buyers, to verify their accounts. Like usual let us do their dirty work for them. If they truly wanted to show that the seller was a good seller because he had completed x number of transactions they would count every transaction not just the first one. My 2nd, 5th, and even 10th transaction with the same person lends more to my credibility than counting only the first transaction. So really if they want an accurate count of people that are happy with my service only count the repeat customers not the first ones.
Don't get blinded by the smoke and mirrors, this has nothing at all to do with safety, it has everything to do with shifting the power from the CC companies to PayPal, who themselves now have a debit card which is usually associated with a bank and these people are not a bank and not even FDIC insured.
posted on June 26, 2001 11:41:14 AM newNo. "Unique" means that you have conducted one transaction with another verified member. Any additional transactions with the sender would not impact the community number in an upward manner (In other words, only one payment per one person will move the Community Number up. Additional payments,made by the same party, will not be reflected in the calculation).
So a particular bidder is satisfied enough with your product and service to win more than 20 of your auctions (on multiple auction sites) over a period of several months...
According to PayPal, the total number of transactions completed with this individual would not be significant enough to include in a member rating in order "to help the users gauge potential risk."
posted on June 26, 2001 11:43:56 AM new
But, paypaldamon, how is the amount of verified sellers I have dealt with anybody else's business other than PayPal's and mine?
I don't think it is my business how many sellers anyone else has dealt with. #1, it isn't going to tell me that the seller is any good, #2, it doesn't tell me how those transactions went.
So why give this particular piece of info to someone else, who frankly can't use it for anything?
Your response would be appreciated.
----------------------------------------------
It would be foolish to believe that certain data is not bought, sold or traded among businesses.
The retailers themselves farm out their retail data to other direct marketers. This is in addition to the credit card companies. These lists are compiled and sold regularly. It happens everyday. Look in your mailbox today and you'll find a new credit card offer, catalog or other targeted direct mail offer. If you like fishing, you receive fishing catalogs. If you buy clothing in the mail, watch for Victoria's Secret and Land's End. Like Lillian vernon? You'll receive every $9.99 offer under the sun. Is this coincidence or is it an effective direct marketing campaign, all made possible by the buying and selling of personal data? Seems clear to me...
We are living in a very technologically advance society. Much of your personal information is stored in thousands of databases worldwide. If you're worried about Paypal showing the number of completed transctions you've had in your history, you might want to investigate this issue further, as you'll find much more to worry about.
A few simple clicks on the paypal website will remedy your current problem. You can deactivate your account and find an alternate payment processing company that won't keep or disclose your personal information. Lots of luck finding one, as one does not exisit.
My note is not intended to show any disrespect, nor to simgle out your belief. It's to let you know that big brother is watching and there's little, if not nothing, you can do about it.
posted on June 26, 2001 12:38:38 PM new
Pardon me if this was addressed, I did read 75% of the posts but I am really in a hurry to make this point to paypal.
Coming from the female gender with a love of shopping, and other shop a holic's world wide that make up a big percentage I am sure of internet auction buyers.....I sure wouldn't want my husband looking at my account to see how many transactions I did!!!
Please don't do this new feedback as this would be disasterous to some and definitely not increase business with paypal if anything it would discourage it. Is anybody stepping in everyone's shoes when they come up with these stupid ideas?
"Coming from the female gender with a love of shopping, and other shop a holic's world wide that make up a big percentage I am sure of internet auction buyers.....I sure wouldn't want my husband looking at my account to see how many transactions I did!!!"
We are not:
1. Releasing the number of transactions made.
2. Releasing the dollar amount of the transactions.
The number only reflects how many unique, verified members you have done business with once.
posted on June 26, 2001 12:44:46 PM new"1)if the seller is unverified do the number of unique transactions with verified users still show up?
No. The number only counts when the transactions occur between verified members.
So..a non-verified seller will have no transactions showing to a potential customer even if he/she has actually had close to a thousand successful, trouble free paypal payments recieved...in affect, paypal is implying to the customer that the customer should be wary of this seller as he has 0 transactions.
.just an indicator of how many users that they have dealt with that have not had an issue.
Nothing in the letter I recieved mentioned anything about "how many users they have dealt with that have not had an issue"...nor does the sample "community participation box" in any way mention that the number reflect those transactions that have "not had an issue". From one of your statements earlier in this thread, to give information on "issues" like number of chargebacks is against "privacy rules".
This is just a guide, much as traditional feedback is used, to help the users gauge potential risk.
How does telling how many VERIFIED transactions give more information to guage potential risk as opposed to how many TOTAL transactions (verified and non-verified). As a buyer, I would be more comfortable with knowing a seller has had 987 succesful transactions with both verified and non-verified buyers than I would with someone who has had 26 successful transactions with verified buyers.
The implication is that only verified users are safe, which is a HUGE CROCK OF S**T!
Borillar had it wrong...the problem here is not a privacy issue but a slander issue.
If paypal SERIOUSLY felt that being verified was important to a safe transaction between users paypal would make verification mandatory and would terminate any account that was not verified. The fact that paypal does not terminate these accounts proves to me that verification is NOT for safety of the members but to reduce paypal's liability for chargebacks.
Paypal wants to keep its cake and wants to eat it too...they want all the money they get from my non-verified account but they don't want to be liable for any possible chargebacks that may charged to them, the merchant account.
Again, we have another case of paypal being two-faced about something. TO SAD!
Not to worry Damon..paypal won't have to worry about my customers doing a chargeback. I dropped mention of paypal in my auctions when you recently raised fees...I was not happy that paypal could not send me an email about this VERY IMPORTANT piece of information (even though I had opted-in to informational emails from paypal). I no longer offer paypal in my EOA notices. This latest piece of garbage has just cemented my decision to drop paypal.
See ya paypal...it has been an INTERESTING experience, to say the least!
i'd like to know how and when this info is supposed to show up - when the person doing a pp transaction goes to make it? or available anytime (enter pp user's email - like ebay's feedback)?
posted on June 26, 2001 12:55:12 PM new
And that's not a number of transactions? Nice play on words. You are posting a number. A Number of transactions done with verified buyers and sellers. So...if your push is to get everyone verified which I am sure is the sole purpose of this addition. Pretty soon (if paypal had it's way) that number would be more accurate to the number of different verified buyers a seller has. Totally an invasion of privacy. We didn't opt into this when we signed up. When we signed up for Ebay we knew there was feedback but when we signed up for paypal we weren't told that the amount of things we bought would be advertised to whom ever wanted to look it up! When is this suppose to go into effect?
posted on June 26, 2001 12:56:21 PM new
Hi kittykittykitty,
The information can be found on the web site, but I will post it here:
Where is it shown?
When a seller receives a payment without a Confirmed Address, the seller will be asked to manually accept or deny the payment. (Sellers may change their Payment Receiving Preferences to automatically accept or deny these payments from their Profile.) On the Accept/Deny page, information regarding the buyer will be shown, including verification status, account creation date, and the Buyer Number. When the Buyer Number reaches 1000, it will be displayed as 1000+.
(As a side note, many sellers have asked for additional tools to gauge risk in a transaction from a user when shipping to a different address (non-confirmed). This is a guide to help buyers, and sellers alike, gauge potential risk. )
posted on June 26, 2001 12:58:30 PM new
Hi jlb444,
"When we signed up for Ebay we knew there was feedback but when we signed up for paypal we weren't told that the amount of things we bought would be advertised to whom ever wanted to look it up! When is this suppose to go into effect?"
The information does not display what the transaction was for or whom it was with. It will be going into effect June 30th.
No particulars on transactions would be viewable to any other user.
posted on June 26, 2001 12:59:53 PM new
paypaldamon wroteThis is just a guide, much as traditional feedback is used, to help the users gauge potential risk. It is not an endorsement of the party...just an indicator of how many users that they have dealt with that have not had an issue.
how can you say that when you are not showing the number of bad transactions? I could be a volume seller that has done say 1000 unique PayPal verified account transactions (to me that would look like a pretty good endorsement) that are showing and I could also be selling weight loss pills and you've processed 250 charge backs in the last few months from unhappy people. all that would show is the 1000 verified people not the 250 people that want their money back.
Actually it might be pretty good when you do a charge back on a seller that stiffs you. Your CC company asks why you did this charge on line and you tell them that PayPal shows that they have done over 1200 verified transactions, I thought that should stand for something......
Verification is not mandatory, as much as I would like it to be, but not being verified does limit the ability of accounts to do additional transactions (until the identification is more secure, which reduces the probability for fraud).
Charge back liability is present for all members of the service (as is the case for all payment services processing credit card payments---to the best of my knowledge). Seller liability is eliminated if they follow the Seller Protection Program (which is unique to the payment service industry---we are the only company that offers protection from charge backs---to the best of my knowledge).
posted on June 26, 2001 01:11:04 PM new
Kinda reminds me of my Great Dane. She thinks if she just moves slowly enough she can climb into your lap without you noticing. She starts with one paw. After a while the other front paw joins the first. Then she gradually begins inching first her head & then the rest of her body up onto you--if you allow her to do so.
Over the past year we have seen PayPal gradually increase the pressure & require more & more info and control. This move comes across as harmless, doesn't it...until you begin to think of what's down the road.
I got rid of PP last fall and never regretted it once. My eBay FB tells my buyers all they need to know about my reliability and trustworthiness. Checks & money orders my take a few days longer to arrive, but that's OK by me.
