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.

