Trader's Ratings feedback

Originally Posted by allesuberschildkroten

Why should get a bad rating if a transaction didn't take place? So its just ok, if you didn't like how someone responded to you to leave them negative feedback? That seems to defeat the purpose of TRADER RATING. Considering the only options are seller, buyer or trade. Not "They hurt my feelings"

Sorry, but it is impossible to enforce such a rule except after the fact. Unless you have some sort of "truth-o-meter" that can be incorporated into the code that you would be willing to share with me, of course. So what YOU want is for US to audit each and every usage of the Trader's Ratings to make a ruling on the authenticity of each rating? Since there are no notices issued to anyone but the recipient of a Trader Rating, just how exactly would you suggest that be done? And then please tell me why exactly I should spend my time and efforts on such a task. Sure as the sun will rise tomorrow, someone would bitch and whine about the way that was being done too. So I've learned from hard experience that I would much rather be bitched at for doing nothing and someone didn't like it, rather than doing something and someone didn't like it.

But anyway in relation to the actual topic of this thread, the REASON I decided to limit the Trader's Ratings to paying members only was because I thought if I had done otherwise, abuse would be much more rampant. But there is ALWAYS going to be some abuse because, well, some people are apparently just wired that way. If you are expecting "perfect", then I am sorry, but you came to the wrong place.

Well, I don't run the site or know how you do any of the stuff. I thought there may be away to limit it to if you only did a transaction that all... So I apologize for not having all the knowledge that you do about the site. It was just something I noticed and didn't see what it had to do with making transactions.. Thats all

Originally Posted by Magic

Justin,

Most buyers aren't stupid. If they look into a seller's feedback and trader ratings and see that someone has left a negative for rude or inappropriate behavior, they can ascertain themselves if the seller is truly that just by conversing and make an informed decision.

I appreciate it when someone lets me know if a seller (or buyer!) is immature or rude. You'll find many sellers won't sell to someone that's rude or impolite- it only creates a headache down the road. There are many buyers also who just don't deal with rude seller. I don't.

Bottom line for me? If you know that you'll be judged (via BOI or trader ratings) on ALL DEALINGS that alone will keep many honest. Don't curse and use racial slurs or act a fool in any communications, and you'll not have many issues.

I understand what you are saying. My point was just that there is no way to prove whoever was rude or not. I could go around giving people negative feedback saying they were rude and there wouldn't be a way to disprove it. I could just be making it up. That was the point I was getting at

Originally Posted by allesuberschildkroten

I understand what you are saying. My point was just that there is no way to prove whoever was rude or not. I could go around giving people negative feedback saying they were rude and there wouldn't be a way to disprove it. I could just be making it up. That was the point I was getting at

Welcome to the internet.

Originally Posted by WebSlave

Welcome to the internet.

I know... I was just curious. I don't know what all you can and can't do with the site

Unless it was integrated in an incestuous fashion like eBay (which could suuuuuuuuuuuck in its own ways), you cannot really expect the site to monitor transaction legitimacy, either.

I could say you sent me a box of feces instead of a group of impressa hatchlings right now and the site would not really be able to verify it as implemented. However, payment in the form of membership contribution fees/dues at least provides some barrier to entry by having those who leave feedback put some skin into the game instead of every letting every person with more time and malice than business and ethical sense lob anonymous attacks to hurt competitors.

The way it is now, a person has to pay to hurt another in that fashion and exposes him/herself to identification and potential retaliation in the very process. Even if two parties simply dislike each other, they are at least in a situation where the system attempts to dissuade them from being maximally petty. The emotional intensity has to be high enough to override that discouragement in order for vindictive feedback to be left, unlike so many kids on /b/ flippantly crapping all over each other anonymously.

Basically, a monetary value is assigned to your voice and, to an extent, your identity. In the aggregate whole, this should reduce careless incidence of abusive feedback relative to the alternative.

I think that was pretty much the whole reason that the trader rating option was originally restricted to paying members, to help cut down on frivolous and fraudulent ratings, although like its been said, there is no way to make sure none occur.

I don't feel super strongly one way or another about opening it up to all members. Although I do consider it one of the perks to paying to be a contributor, it's not one of the ones that is the reason why I do pay out for a contributor membership, so I won't stop being one whatever is decided. There are some potential benefits to opening it up but I do believe they will be outweighed by the potential abuses that can be made of it and that with open participation in the BOI already available, it isn't needed. I'd rather be able to defend against a baseless charge in a BOI thread myself from some misunderstanding or someone that just doesn't like you, than to have to go crying to a Mod over an unfair Rating. With what they already do, I don't think it's fair to ask them to moderate the Ratings as well, so I can completely get behind the idea that if it is opened up to everyone, we will just have to take our lumps, although I don't expect to be happy about it if someone maliciously tanks my Trader Rating.

Originally Posted by allesuberschildkroten

I thought there may be away to limit it to if you only did a transaction that all...

I've given and received trader ratings for transactions that did not originate via this site. There's really no way to verify *if* a transaction took place. While it would be wonderful to ensure there could be no abuse of the system, there really isn't any fool proof way to do so.

I think leaving it for paying members will help alleviate the rampant abuse that would/could occur if it was open to all.

Also while I do look for trader ratings before dealing with someone, I weigh feedback on the BOI much higher.

It would be interesting to see how many paying members are unhappy with the status quo. I suspect not very many. It would be very nice for anyone to be able to leave positive feedback for a good transaction, but the simple fact is, most of the knee-jerk negative reactions and temper tantrums come from non-payers.

Noelle

If you have to do it, make it a requirement that posters who have say 100+ posts or higher set number before they are allowed to give rating. Or do so wit ha post count and active account more then one year or so, to stop new comers from doing it.