posted on January 21, 2001 12:44:47 PM new
Increases if fees are a no-go, because they have to make money to stay in business. and at appx 7% of my sales, it's danged CHEAP.
I would like:
Some means to weed out the repeat NARU bidders. You know the ones, they bid on a gazillion things and then say "OH, you mean I have to PAY for thast", get NARU and then come back with a fresh AOL user name or other freebie mail place address.
But this would have to be a means that also does not overly discourage new users ...
posted on January 21, 2001 01:46:16 PM new
Protection against deadbeat bidders. I'm getting 50 deadbeats a month, and I still have to pay eBay listing fees for these auctions.
posted on January 21, 2001 01:55:38 PM new
1. Refund to seller of ALL (listing, final value, special feature, reserve etc) fees on a deadbeat bidder sale, and then ALL fees charged to the buyer. All buyers would have to have either a credit card, or a mailed in by check or money order credit balance on every account ($10.00 should do it - no credit no bid - just like in the past, no credit no listing) - just like a seller used to have. This would do several things - cut wayyyyy down (not eliminate) on deadbeats, shill addys, false addys, multiple nonsense addys etc.
2. Disable the ability of deadbeats to leave feedback
3. Refund of ALL fees for the month of October, where sellers were defrauded by ebaY who lied about their non-functioning site
4. Implement a fair standardized and consistent appeal system for ended auctions, VERO's and NARU's.
posted on January 21, 2001 02:01:35 PM newUser verification!!!
Make it more difficult for suspended users to re-register under a new name and e-mail address--especially AOL users, because AOL allows them to reinvent their ID's and e-mail addresses without any limit--which means they can register over and over and over agian as "new" Ebay users every time they get suspended!
In my experience as a seller for 3 years, the biggest problem is unverified users who can't be effectively suspended.
posted on January 22, 2001 11:44:15 AM new
IMO, eBay as a g-l-o-b-a-l marketplace simply can't demand that bidders PAY to register.
IMO, there are SO many fake sham userids EITHER: engaging in random shill-bidding on other people's auctions to camoflage bids on their own auctions 0R so many fake sham userids intentionally engaging in auction sabotage (bidding HIGH, with NO intentions of ever paying) 0R so many desperate eBay competitors registering with fake sham userids to spread disinformation, malicious rumors & sending FAKE email questions to sellers to WASTE their time and rile them......
There are SO many possible scenarios at work, even that old standby oft mentioned here of the archetypal "bored teenager" creating havoc in the lives of small cyberauctioneers.
I do not see ANY viable way that eBay can control any of same, without becoming a private network (ah, - not *this* decade, lol) 0R having an encryption system requiring fingerprint identification, (ah, - *not* likely, hey?!)
In the future, however, there will be very interesting Ph.D. theses written by data archivists who will track down and identify the RL perpetrators of all the above depicted activities, and other more pathological criminal. There's tooooo many trails, all over, and only the finest hackerz can possibly cover their tracks or eliminate all traces.
These discoveries will pose a severe embarressment to some individuals to be thusly identified for such activities, but similar behaviors of so many types of shennanigans will have been discovered to have been SO rampant at the turn of the millennium, that no one will care much about the retrieval of these actual facts, except in cases of blatant illegality.
posted on January 22, 2001 01:47:20 PM new
MRGROUP,
This is a bit off topic but if you don't allow NPB to leave feedback that just shifts the power from the buyer to the seller.
Imagine a crooked seller that doesn't get what he wanted for an item. The seller could just file a NPB to the buyer, ingore all attempts to work it out, request FVF back then the buyer gets a scar on his feedback for NPB and the seller gets off scott free without the buyer having any recourse.
While there are huge problems the way it is set up know there has to be another way.
posted on January 22, 2001 02:22:20 PM new
psst Chris97 it's
r n group
hehheh
I think they ought to consider security for new bidders a real issue. Sure sellers are scammed, but man-oh-man I can see the rip offs and worse when a newbie comes into the ring.
One thread that powderblue started talked about new bidders balking at just "taking a risk" without escrow and insurance.
I bet that bidder doesn't think twice when ordering from the Patagonia Store online for 10 to 20 times that amount.
Beyond that, get a better search, get a way to search and sort sellers who have pages of info.
Oh and sponser "be nice to snipers" week, with a complimentary commuter mug and t-shirt.
posted on January 22, 2001 03:05:40 PM new
radh is back!! Where the heck you've been?!?!
Anyway, the thorny issue of VERO's has got to be handled somehow. The DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) has given them so broad of a power, that it's almost like a Monopoly-type bill for these folks.
If you even mention "Metallica" badly as of late, you get sued. That's how bad it is.
I would propose several fixes to VERO:
1. VERO's who nuke auctions must be nuking auctions that they are copyrighted too, and not something else.
If I put up a photo of my Great Grandpa Jeff Buckley for auction, I don't want jeffdefender rearing her ugly head into my family affairs. If I wanna sell Grandpa, that's my choice, not hers.
2. VERO's must be held accountable for any auctions they were not allowed to nuke under the DMCA.
I'd say, everytime someone appeals and proves without a shadow of a doubt that the VERO acted unfairly to them, THEY should pay the listing, relisting, special features (if any, like gallery or Gift Icons) and FVF, not the seller.
3. eBay must clamp down on VERO's to a point allowed to them under the DMCA.
Even thought the DMCA forces eBay to abide by the wishes of the VERO's, eBay should put it's foot down when one VERO indiscrimanately nukes a buncha auctions not even related to their copyright. eBay looses money when they have VERO's who weild too much power.
4. Make the appeals process painless as possable. After all, eBay is gonna be paid again for the cost of listing should the appeal be overturned after 14 days.
One of my more basic stances aganst the DMCA, but I don't wanna stray off topic.
:\\\"Crystalline Sliver cannot be the target of spells or abilities.
