[ARC5] Re: [Boatanchors] Re: [Milsurplus] OT: NewEbay Rules for FB

[J Forster]

Read what I said. The seller has to mark an item as paid before the buyer can
now leave FB. This is new, w/in the last few months I think.

As to your practice of not leaving FB as a seller until the buyer has left FB
for you it stinks. As soon as a buyer has completed his part of the contract, he
is entitled to positive FB.

-John

======================

jeremy-ca wrote:

> I NEVER leave FB unless specifically asked AND after received  yet buyers
> have left me plenty of FB. I suspect something wrong with your statement.
>
> Carl
> KM1H
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "J Forster" <jfor at quik.com>
> To: <Radioman390 at cs.com>
> Cc: "Boat Anchors" <boatanchors at mailman.qth.net>; <ARC5 at mailman.qth.net>;
> <Rebecca-Eureka at yahoogroups.com>; <armyradios at yahoogroups.com>;
> <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 12:03 PM
> Subject: [Boatanchors] Re: [Milsurplus] OT:   New Ebay Rules for FB
>
> > Not necessarily:
> >
> > Has anyone else noticed that you cannot leave FB for a seller, UNLESS the
> > seller has 'marked the item as paid' ?
> >
> > If that continues under the new scheme, sellers can simply block FB from
> > transactions that don't go to their liking by simply not marking items as
> > paid.  In fact, eBay could start removing buyers, simply because sellers
> > are
> > not marking items paid, even though they have been.
> >
> > Of course, eBay will answer that if you use PayPal, items automatically
> > get
> > marked paid. But PayPal gives far less protection for buyers than, say,
> > USPS
> > Money Orders.
> >
> > IMO, this is partly a ploy by eBay to force you to use their 'banking'
> > system, and major profit center, PayPal.
> >
> > FWIW,
> > -John
> >
> > ============================
> >
> > Radioman390 at cs.com wrote:
> >
> >> J Forster <jfor at quik.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Subject:             New Ebay Rules (was Re: [hp_agilent_equipment] Re:
> >> >HP 8447D)
> >> >    Date:             Tue, 29 Jan 2008 22:17:00 -0600
> >> >   From:             Dave-NR1DX/0 <nr1dx at arrl.net>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >Among other things in the new rules sellers will no longer be able to
> >> >leave negative feedback for buyers ..... interesting concept ...
> >> >
> >> ========================
> >
> >>
> >> The new rules are just a step in the process of changing EBAY into a pure
> >> advertising company, where you pay for the listing and for successful
> >> transactions only in the form of transaction and PayPal fees.
> >>
> >> I have mixed feelings about dropping older feedbacks (after 12 months)
> >> and relying on current transactions for the FB ratings. I joined EBay two
> >> weeks before 9-11-01, and my first 10 transactions went sour because I
> >> was living in a hotel in NYC working 7 days a week. Although I completed
> >> over half of those transactions and paid the sellers later, the damage
> >> was done. Subsequent deals have been 100% good, but those 10 negatives
> >> dropped me down to 98.6%.
> >>
> >> Since I frequently sell or trade, not being able to give negative ratings
> >> to winning bidders who default, seems to me to be favoring EBay's image
> >> building plan. It will no doubt increase the number of unsold items,
> >> which costs the sellers the listing fees for repeated attempts to sell
> >> and does nothing to penalize spurious buyers.
> >>
> >> I suppose that Meg Whitman is leaving because the "new EBay" she created
> >> is not fun anymore despite the cute graphics (I feel like I'm at a church
> >> bake sale). They seem to have learned from Craig's List (they own 25%)
> >> policy of totally free listings. EBay costs around 10% for a completed
> >> deal, based on listing fees (unless you start at 99 cents), buy-it-now or
> >> reserve fees, completed deal fees, and the 3% for Paypal. What we have to
> >> decide is whether it's worth it.
> >>
> >> To summarize, only Sellers can get negative listings, right?
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> >