posted on October 21, 2000 09:09:37 PM new
eBay is putting my business at risk. Why should I leave negative feedback for 20 deadbeats per week, and risk retaliatory negs, just so I can play "good corporate citizen" and rat out the deadbeats? Am I supposed to drive myself out of business because eBay refuses to clean up its own mess?
In the seller's feedback file, the buyer gets the last word (through a follow-up comment). Buyers are allowed to make false, libelous and slanderous remarks, and eBay lets it stand. Even when the buyer is permamently suspended, the retalitatory feedback remains because removing the feedback makes eBay responsible, and eBay doesn't want that! Buyers who are suspended for non-payment can easily create a new account and come back to harass sellers again.
Hey, eBay! Don't ask me to play Net Cop when you are not willing to do so. Don't expect me to put my reputation at risk and my business on the line because you can't clean up your own site. Find another stool pidgeon.
You are sounding seriously burned out again. Maybe it's time for another break? Take the girls to the beach or mountains for a weekend & let this pass?
posted on October 21, 2000 09:45:33 PM new
This is something I personally CAN NOT stand. Just because someone posts something on this board it does NOT mean that person "needs a break"!! We all get fed up with some of the nonsense! It doesn't mean we all need to "take a break"!
Twinsoft: I agree that ebay needs to do something with the feedback system - but if we don't leave those well deserved negs for our deadbeats, that person will only keep doing it to others. I check all feedbacks of my customers and I am thankful to the sellers before me who left NEGS to warn me about that seller.
posted on October 21, 2000 09:56:14 PM new
I too recognize that the system is flawed, but refuse to allow my hard-earned reputation to be ruined by low-lifes.
I file NPBs as needed, but stop short of posting negs. For one thing, filing the NPB gets the deadbeat booted more efficiently. For another, I hardly, if ever, peruse a bidder's FB before the auction closes, and most times not even after.
If I ever did decide to start checking bidders' FB for the purpose of deciding whether to allow their bid to stand (which could be the only benefit of taking time to do this), I'd be doing little else.
Soon I'd have no auctions listed and wouldn't need to worry about deadbeats.
posted on October 21, 2000 09:57:57 PM new
twinsoft: i hear ya.
I have NO idea who eBay gets some of their ideas from; sometimes it's as though one of their competitors is actually advising them, devising the worst possible for the actual site users.
I don't know what to think - but I find all this ILLOGIC to be sickening.
posted on October 21, 2000 10:04:52 PM new
I've cancelled two bids in the last month from bidder rated below 10, with 2-4 negs. I really appreciate that other sellers made that public.
All 4 of my negs are from dimblubs who sent cash, and negged me when their cash was stolen in transit. I hit them back with retalitory negs. One dweeb who was local posted a retraction after I told him that being local I would sue him for libel (he found his payment in his car unmailed).
I've negged every single person who has deadbeated me, a few actually paid after I negged them.
Ebay policy pretty much requires that you have to sue to get a neg removed. They should at least allow a neg to be removed if the poster submited a written letter of retraction.. No reason to clog the courts if we can intimidate the deadbeats with a certified letter or a pre-paid legal letter.
posted on October 21, 2000 10:11:32 PM new
I, too, am tired of ebay doing nothing about deadbeat bidders.
My policy is now that if I receive no payment after 30 days, I leave negative feedback. I feel this is quite generous since I send 3 emails to bidder, file NPB, etc. in attempt to have deadbeat pay.
My TOS state payment expected in 14 days. Most bidders pay within a week. It's not fair to them to be outbid by deadbeats.
posted on October 21, 2000 10:16:17 PM new
I UNDERSTAND what you are saying, and I haven't been burned and don't intend to be - I use to pay it by the book, but eBay expects that of everyone but itself, so I don't leave negative feedback, no, I'm not ruining my feedback to patrol for eBay. At least on Yahoo, you can respond, and respond again to inane comments in one's feedback. AND YOU CAN BLACK LIST BUYERS FROM BIDDING AND NOT BE BOTHEREED WITH THEM AGAIN.
posted on October 21, 2000 10:53:13 PM newtwinsoft: Hooray! for you! I too REFUSE to leave NEGS. And I've been called on these boards anything from a WEENIE to a EUNUCH!
Your view is valid in my book! The fair & honest system could work like this: once a seller files & eBay pays the FVF credit, then the buyer should be blocked from leaving transactional FB for that seller. UNLESS THE BUYER PROVIDES PROOF OF PAYMENT!
This system would be FAIR! It would be HONEST! And it would encourage EMASCULATED WEENIES like moi to leave APPROPRIATE feedback!
posted on October 21, 2000 11:15:14 PM new
Oh boohoo to yooyoo! DEADBEAT bidders are the scum of the universe! The slime that oozes out of the alimentary eBay! Now go to sleep!
posted on October 22, 2000 12:29:44 AM new
80% of the negs I go to leave never do show up, since the bidder has been suspended by that time. Other sellers beat me to the punch, so to speak.
posted on October 22, 2000 05:17:41 AM new
eoi - "All 4 of my negs are from dimblubs who sent cash, and negged me when their cash was stolen in transit."
Hmmm - that sounds a LOT higher than the theft standard, which for me after years of sending cash, is zero. With all due respect, I'd be a bit suspicious too if I were a buyer that sent you cash that went 'missing' for the 4th time!
Have you requested an investigation by your postal authorities? If your mail carrier driving a new car these days?
posted on October 22, 2000 07:34:25 AM new
When i am bidding on an item, I always check out the sellers feedback and 99% of the time i can tell if the negatives they received are deserved or if they were posted in retailiation. It is generally not hard to do, it just takes a bit more time. Make sure you check out the feedback of the people that left them the negative.
posted on October 22, 2000 07:45:30 AM newThis is something I personally CAN NOT stand. Just because someone posts something on this board it does NOT mean that person "needs a break"!! We all get fed up with some of the nonsense! It doesn't mean we all need to "take a break"!
Perhaps, onsale you didn't realize that several weeks ago (it might have even been a couple of months ago..my memory fades), twinsoft acknowledged on these boards that he was getting burned out, losing his perspective & letting things get to him, so he was going to take a break for a while & have some fun with his girls.
When I saw his post last night, it looked like he might be getting into the same situation again, hence my advice he might want to "take a break" from it like he did earlier when he came back feeling a bit better & more relaxed.
I don't really care if you personally can't stand it or not. My advice was to twinsoft based on his past & present personal situation.
posted on October 22, 2000 07:48:33 AM newIf Ebay was really interested in fixing this deadbeat problem...
They would fix it. There are several ways to decrease the amount of user and I.D. abuse. Not the least of which is requiring some sort of verification for BUYERS as well as sellers.
If Ebay is worried that this will frighten off users, then what do they think all of these negative news reports about user and I.D. abuse are doing?
Plain and simple: Ebay doesn't have the guts. They are corporate cowards too blind to see the forest through the trees.
P.S. As far as the original poster of this thread "needing a break", I suggest to you that the person saying that needs their head examined. They obviously don't understand the need for this problem to be fixed, and be fixed PRONTO!
posted on October 22, 2000 09:40:02 AM new
The buyer gets the last word in the seller's feedback profile, and they can make any claim whatosever. Libelous, slanderous, and eBay does nothing and won't remove the comments. Yet eBay expects me to put my reputation on the line by leaving 20 negative feedbacks a week for non-paying bidders. Gee, thanks! Am I really supposed to run my own business into the ground because "spoofing" bids on eBay has become the latest craze among high school teenagers?
If eBay cared about this they would do something. Asking me to police their site at the expense of my feedback profile is not the answer.
Eventer if you'd just processed 22 NPB alters and 29 credit requests, you might be "burned out" too.
posted on October 22, 2000 09:51:30 AM new
twinsoft,
I fully understand your frustration & support ebay doing something to help relieve the situation that some sellers are having.
My original comment to you was not to make light of your plight but rather to wonder if perhaps you were back in the frustration you felt earlier this year when you decided to take a brief break & whether that might help a bit?
posted on October 22, 2000 10:08:32 AM new
Mballai perhaps your world wouldn't end, but why should I be the one whose butt is waving in the wind, while I leave 20-30 complaints per week for non-paying bidders. For what? So I can protect another seller's auctions? That's eBay's job, not mine. eBay is big enough that they can exercise some control over their bidders. They expect sellers to police their site but offer no protection, especially in the Feedback Forum.
Bidders can go in and get a new account any time. I've worked for three years to build up my feedback. I'm not going to wreck that because eBay is now encouraging 13-year olds to place phony bids. You heard me right!
posted on October 22, 2000 12:10:24 PM new
twinsoft
Well I agree with you on that eBay should be doing a better job.
I do know sellers who do not leave negative feedback and that's their perogative. I believe that response simply encourages more non-paying bidders and I don't appreciate it.
If a bidder is busy racking up multiple NPBs, sellers could band together. I pursued one deadbeat with others--he was NARU'd shortly thereafter and no one got burned.
BTW retaliatory negs by deadbeats are very easy to spot...most are listed as NARU'd
Deadbeats are nothing more than unvarnished thieves. Deadbeats can expect negative feedback from me just as likely as a thief will face the barrel of my .45. I refuse to let anyone push me around, much less some pimple-faced, pencil-necked twit who thinks eBay is for their amusement.
Well 4 stolen cash payments (from 4 buyers) out of about 2000 auctions is not bad. What really annoyed me is that I state in RED BOLD that I don't want cash sent to me, and that if a buyer does, it is at their own risk. You seem to be imoplying that one bidder lost cash 4 times.
One dweeb goes... I prefer to pay with cash, since I don't have balance my check book that way. Industry standards and accepted practice is that a merchant is NOT liable for cash sent thru the mail. Do you send your car payment, credit card, morgage or insurance payments in cash? Why are my terms as a seller less binding then a person's bank?
I'm pretty sure that it was either theft from my mail carrier or they were being mis-deliveried by the same carrier, who was a temp replacement for my regular carrier.
One of the four did admit that he never actually mailed the money. One other I suspect was a not playing with a full deck, he had a couple negs left by others for harassment and irrational behavior. The 3rd sent cash the 1st time, which was lost, and then sent a check, got his item, and left me a neg for stealing his cash. None of these people who swear out a compliant against under penality of prejury, even after I emailed them the address for the local USPI Office.
I think that, with the exception of some intl buyers, domestic bidders who send cash thru the mail are either cheap/lazy or fools. Especially since I have a NO HOLD policy on checks (not worth the trouble for my average price of $15)
[ edited by eoi on Oct 22, 2000 12:32 PM ]
[ edited by eoi on Oct 22, 2000 12:36 PM ]
posted on October 22, 2000 12:52:03 PM new
Well, thanks for putting up with my rave. But my point is this. eBay does everything they can to distance themselves from legal liability. They refuse to edit the feedback forum because it might tend to make them responsible for the content of the site. They don't want that. If you make a complaint about some feedback left by a deadbeat, they tell you "get a court order."
eBay works hard to maintain their "we're only a venue status" but turns around and asks sellers like me to put my feedback profile at risk by leaving negative feedback for deadbeat bidders. I'm willing to file for FVF and after the third non-payment the bidder is suspended. Why should I take this into the feedback forum? Potential bidders don't look through 100 pages of feedback. They only look at the little red numbers at the top.
Hey, I'm willing to take my share of deserved "undeserved" negs, but I won't play auction cop for eBay. At some point this becomes a security issue. I get more than my share of crackpots and eBay is putting my personal info out there for anyone to read. They should assume more responsibility for the content of the site.
posted on October 22, 2000 01:13:46 PM new
I for one view my high bidders feedback. I appreciate and applaud other sellers who have the courage to leave appropriate feedback for deadbeat bidders so I know what to expect. It's nothing short of total frustration to have a high bidder who is non responsive and doesn't follow thru with payment. I look at their feedback and can't understand what the problem is because those sellers I call "yeller" don't post appropriate feedback. Sure, I've had retaliatory feedback left for me and I always leave a reply to it stating that it is retaliatory feedback. I like to think potential buyers have enough common sense to put two and two together should they view my feedback b4 bidding. If you don't have the courage to leave a neg, at least leave a neutral so the rest of us sellers know what to expect instead of being left out to dry.
As for Ebay removing negatives. In the 3 years I've been on Ebay, I've taken my licks and kept on ticking. The last neg. that was left for me tho in retaliation I did report to safe harbor because the woman abbreviated a swear word in her follow up remark to my reply stating it was retaliatory feedback. Ebay reviewed it and removed the whole feedback remark and sent her a warning so I'm back down to 4 retaliatory negs which I explain on my "ME" page. I feel I have all bases covered for potential bidders not to feel threatened by bidding on my auctions. Heck...most bidders don't even view a sellers feedback.
posted on October 22, 2000 02:10:58 PM new
Look, we're talking 20-30 deadbeats a week. What happens when my feedback rating reaches 200 or 300 negatives? Then there can be no question that my "ratting out" my customers to eBay has wrecked my business. And I want to emphasize that eBay does next-to nothing to protect sellers. They can limit what you can sell, the way you describe it, which category you list it in, even the words you use in your description. But when it comes to slander in a seller's feedback profile, their hands are "tied." They provide no protection.
I would not expect or even hope that another seller would put his business at risk, just to warn me of a potential deadbeat. eBay has sold you on the notion that "we're a community and it's YOUR responsibility." It's THEIR responsibility to provide a SAFE trading environment. And expecting sellers to leave 100 complaints a month for deadbeats is putting a business at risk.
posted on October 22, 2000 02:36:06 PM newFor one thing, filing the NPB gets the deadbeat booted more efficiently. For another, I hardly, if ever, peruse a bidder's FB before the auction closes, and most times not even after.
I agree with this 100%. Ebay could care less how many negatives a buyer has. IF the buyer has an overall -4 feedback and IF someone reports them, (I think) they'll get booted. Ebay only cares when it starts affecting their pocketbook, i.e. when the FVF is filed. I forget the exact number but if the buyer gets (3/4?) FVFs filed against them, they automatically get booted. Much more efficient.
What about the DEADBEAT sellers? That is far worse than a deadbeat bidder any day.
