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

[jeremy-ca]

I read what you said and it is still wrong as of today. I never mark as 
paid, its simply another waste of time as it affects nothing.

As far as stinks you are entitled to your opinion. I find too many buyers 
are certified nut cases and protecting my FB reputation is more important to 
ME. What you think is meaningless.

Knowing that some idiot is going to get slammed right back, if it is 
deserved, keeps most in the asylum.

Carl
KM1H




----- Original Message ----- 
From: "J Forster" <jfor at quik.com>
To: "jeremy-ca" <km1h at jeremy.mv.com>
Cc: <Radioman390 at cs.com>; "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 1:42 PM
Subject: Re: [Boatanchors] Re: [Milsurplus] OT:   NewEbay Rules for FB


> 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?
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> >
>
>