Silk Road forums
Discussion => Silk Road discussion => Topic started by: Colonel Sanders on August 10, 2011, 08:12 am
-
I already stated this in another thread, but decided to make a thread about it.
We desperately need buyer feedback. The forum is getting chock full of one feedback horror story after another because the buyers have impunity to be as nitpicky with their ratings as they want--or to outright leave troll feedbacks.
Or, as I recently had happen to me, a buyer can claim he didn't receive shipment (even when Delivery Confirmation shows they received it). What recourse does that leave a seller? He can fight it in resolution, but the buyer will almost surely leave negative feedback, while the seller has no such ability (although he may get to keep his bitcoins). In my case, I simply cancelled the order and gave up the Bitcoins rather than risk the negative feedback, especially with the unfriendly new seller rating system.
We need to be able to rate buyers on their transactions as well, and to be able to give feedback responses.
And unfortunately, the ONLY way buyer feedback can work is if buyers have to purchase their accounts as well. Otherwise, a buyer will just make a new account at the first negative feedback. Sellers already don't have that luxury, both with having to buy their accounts AND with having to have a good feedback history in order to attract customers. And with the current system, there is NO way to keep track of scamming buyers.
It makes me disgusted as hell to be suggesting this, because I'm a big advocate of letting the market be free and open and work on its own, but the anonymity is fucking up how things should work with the buyers and their reputation.
This needs to happen.
-
im not a seller but im all for buyer feedback and as long as its reasonably priced i wouldnt object too heavily to paying for an account but it would have to be a reasonable amount, if im right a seller account is 10 btc, which is fine as sellers will make money back from it but buyers dont so it would need to be cheaper. the only other downside i can think of is that when most people hear about or come across this fine place they are usually very reluctant to believe its for real so i think it may discourage new potential buyers from signing up (many of my friends told me i was a fool when i made my first order and that i was throwing my money away on a scam, boy were their faces red when i broke out that mdma)
i suppose another option would be to switch the site to an invite/referral only basis but again youd be limiting the amount of new buyers coming in, which could be bad for sellers. the bottom line really is do we have enough of a community built up that the people here can support it fine, its a system that works on many a private torrent tracker, my main tracker is invite only with the exception of a few days a year when reg is open and even then they dont try to heavily publicise the fact that its open, its just a "tell your friends" situation
but all that said ive made a good few orders now and have had no reason at all to give anything but 5/5 feedback on all transactions ive made, maybe ive been lucky but ive had better service here than at most online stores for legal goods, even stuff ive ordered from abroad got here faster than things ive ordered legit from the states
-
Wow, pretty radical idea.
At minimum there should be a private area for sellers to interaction about problem buyers.
What we don't want is a buyer vs seller war, via the feedback.
I still would like to grade product separate from service, after all "everybody has got an opinion."
Looks to me the fight will always be, weed out the bad buyers, and bad sellers.
Don't know if I want to "buy" an buyers account, but the more I think about it, the more I think you are correct.
Any other opinions???
-
Perhaps Silk Road could start to list the delivery statistics of each buyer; i.e, if a buyer has made 10 orders and only received 6 of them, then that buyer's delivery percentage is 60%. Sellers can look at this figure and judge the chance of their order getting to that buyer.
This figure might be low because the buyer has nosy, thieving roommates, or that the buyer's mail delivery service is just terrible. But even if the buyer is blameless, the seller can see that orders only have a limited chance of getting to this buyer.
Of course, I'm assuming here that the seller hasn't made any mistakes like illegibly scribbling the buyer's address on the package. And a few sellers have been known to mark orders as "In Transit" even though they didn't send the order. Perhaps we could match buyer delivery stats against those of the seller, so if a buyer who has received all his orders suddenly claims he didn't get his order, we could look at the feedback and forum comments for the seller. If the seller is a known scammer, then we might take the non-delivery claims of the buyer as truthful.
-
I like the idea of the statistics on the delivery on the buyer.
-
the statistics based on how often the buyer receives a package is good but they can always make new accounts. It would make some sellers more cautious though with dealing with a buyer who has no prior buys if someone continues to make new accounts. this idea could work well so eventually sellers will be able to only deal with buyers who have a high rate of receiving packages
-
I know this would be a pain to implement, but what about if a buyer had to "buy" a buyers account and then that buyer has a credit of said money. So, if a buyers account cost 5btc he would get it back in product purchases. I don't know if this would stop scammer buyers/bogus feedback but its a thought.
Or to make a buyers account you need to deposit 10 btc's into your account. That would help stop all the new buyer accounts and that buyer would need to spend those btc's. so most likely it would be on multiple transactions. Or have a 20btc deposit minimum.
-
i love the idea, i have been wanting buyer feedback for sometime, it only seems like the logical next step.
the whole paying for a buyers account, im cool with that idea, but i dont think it should become a requirement. SR would then no longer be a "free" market.
you would most likely have to charge a lot for a buyers account, i know 5 piddly bitcoins wouldn't stop a determined troll, and we would all eventually find this out. and you know there would be some douchefucks or LEO that would build up a huge rep by make small purchases to get their reputation up, then scam or bust someone for a big purchase.
say you have to charge 10 - 20 bitcoins per account, then you can say bye bye to new and current customers.
im not trying to be negative in any way, i am 100% for this idea, i am just trying to figure the problems we would face before we faced them.
ideas anyone?
THINK TANK MODE ACTIVATED ;D
-
I think that is a simple solution exist. Allow vendor to respond to each feedback if he want. That way everybody can draw their own conclusion based on content in those feedback.
-
Yea, not make the feedback anonymous either. Plus with the ability for the vendor to respond would be awesome.. Still doesn't stop the buyers to open up millions of accounts though...Thats what I would like to see slow down.
-
Vendor can see who gave him a feedback. On account page -View Feedback-
-
I've already stated this before and I think this is the simplest/most eloquent solution.
Disputed Transactions/Total Transactions in three separate categories - 1 week, 1 month, 3 months
Sure a buyer could have a string of bad luck (common with opiates), but they could always just open a new account and try again. But this way if a pattern builds we can see it and a seller can refuse to do business with them. Also, sellers, if you have a nasty buyer post about it in the forums and "etiquette" be damned. Tell your story - if the buyer is legitimately hurt on their end they will address it, and if not then we know not to sell to that username. As long as you aren't posting actual personal data (unless you can 100% verify it is LE then post away).
-
I have a great deal of respect for the vendors on this site, but threads like this always seem to be a brainstorm on how to make it a huge pain in the ass to be a buyer. For the sake of all vendors on SR, buying should be as easy as possible. Think about it: Which would cause you to lose more business, someone leaving dishonest feedback or buyers disappearing because SR is too hard to use?
I hope there will never be a charge for a buyer's account. Even a .01 BTC charge is too high of a barrier. People want to browse and see what the site is all about before they try to figure out how to use bitcoin. It's really not reasonable to expect them to jump through all those hoops before they see what they can buy.
And I think I, and many other buyers, would stop using SR if my name appeared next to the feedback I left, along what I bought and who it was from. Do I really need to explain why I don't want that to be public? Sorry, but feedback needs to stay anonymous.
As far as statistics on buyers, I don't think that's terrible, but I would worry that vendors would also start refusing to work with new buyers. That would be bad for the same reasons as charging for a buyer's account.
So I know it sucks to get bad feedback, and I want buyers to be honest, but I don't think any drastic changes are necessary or wise. I think it's an unfortunate fact that asshole customers are a fact of life, and they just aren't going away.
-
honestly, i think something needs to be done, the popularity of the silk road makes it a HUGE target for pieces of shit from all around the world.
i know its only a small percentage that are scammer trolls, but its become a huge worry and pain in the ass for sellers on the silk road.
these are just mere suggestions on how to combat the bad apples.
-
I'm a buyer only and I would love to have buyer feedback. I think buyers are just as responsible (if not more) for the feedback they leave and in order for this system to work is the buyer must be rated as well. This does take some of the anonymity out of the entire process though which helps SR thrive.
-
honestly, i think something needs to be done, the popularity of the silk road makes it a HUGE target for pieces of shit from all around the world.
i know its only a small percentage that are scammer trolls, but its become a huge worry and pain in the ass for sellers on the silk road.
these are just mere suggestions on how to combat the bad apples.
Looks like we all agree, something more needs to be done.
Every scumbag that thinks he can get a scam going will be coming here.
Sellers and buyers need to stick together circle the wagons, and protect each other.
-
As for new buyers, if a new buyer really wants something I'm sure a reputable seller would be willing to do an out-of-escrow and vouch for them, that way the buyer can message any seller he wants to deal with and direct them to a forum topic where an established seller has said "all good here".
If you are using PGP then there really isn't much to worry about as far as buyer-anonymity goes, unless you are PGPing your address to an LE poser-seller (can't be helped, but at least this way you have plausible deniability).
-
I agree, we need this.
SR is at risk of becoming an eBay. The buyers need a little skin in the game or it's all too easy to extort the sellers. The sellers are already fighting out of the hole after blowing $150 for an account. The then go into the hole on an escrowed product shipment. Volume is low in all but the major drug categories, so making your money back is damn hard to do. Then, the sellers can nit pick things they don't even understand or extort the seller? Pretend they never got the shipment? Lie about quality?
Sure, these ugly aspects of dirty humans cannot be negated. But if you can bury the would-be buyer the same way he can bury the seller, acting like a dick becomes less attractive. It proves the point, if you give everyone the same weapon, an armed society is a polite society. If we all have the ability to kick each other in the nuts, then using it to gain advantage no longer looks like a good idea, cuz you can get kicked in the nuts, too. Currently, the buyers hold a monopoly of reputation staining. It's the same thing as giving all your guns to politicians and expecting nothing bad will happen... Anyone given a monopoly on force will abuse it to their own advantage. If no one has that monopoly, no one has that advantage.
I choose not to be a dickhead even when I have the opportunity. Maybe I'm just more civilized than most. Maybe I expect my business partner is carrying a gun just like mine and it's not worth the chance... Whatever you choose to believe, putting the feedback weapon in everyone's hand would prevent abuse and extortion. Having a gun makes no one bullet-proof.
This is Reason Numero Uno why I don't have a seller account. SR is essentially handing a $500 credit card to a total stranger, and backing it with a 3rd party's money. This is broken.
If a Seller Account cost 33.3% of a buyer account, it would quickly become not worth it to besmirch and run.
Sellers could simply refuse to sell to noobs, etc. I guess they can do that now, but are put so far in the hole that they can't afford to turn away business, and the buyers abuse that to the hilt...
-
I don't think that buyers should have to purchase their accounts. As a relatively new buyer myself, I can say that I would not be purchasing here right now if I had to pay for an account. It takes a bit to put a small amount of trust in SR and to have to shell out money immediately would have set off my scam-meter and scared me off.
I do agree that there should be some buyer feedback, though. We are both taking risks here so we should both have our reps at risk here.
-
I don't think that buyers should have to purchase their accounts. As a relatively new buyer myself, I can say that I would not be purchasing here right now if I had to pay for an account. It takes a bit to put a small amount of trust in SR and to have to shell out money immediately would have set off my scam-meter and scared me off.
I do agree that there should be some buyer feedback, though. We are both taking risks here so we should both have our reps at risk here.
I recognize your position, and it is valid. But what stops the dirt bags from dumping that account and starting a new one? The buyer has no reputation risk at all, and can defame and scam buyers without recourse. I see no other method but to make them lose more money than it's worth, just like con-artist sellers.
I doubt scams can be completely eliminated. But we can at least make it hurt a little...
-
I agree, we need this.
SR is at risk of becoming an eBay. The buyers need a little skin in the game or it's all too easy to extort the sellers. The sellers are already fighting out of the hole after blowing $150 for an account. The then go into the hole on an escrowed product shipment. Volume is low in all but the major drug categories, so making your money back is damn hard to do. Then, the sellers can nit pick things they don't even understand or extort the seller? Pretend they never got the shipment? Lie about quality?
Sure, these ugly aspects of dirty humans cannot be negated. But if you can bury the would-be buyer the same way he can bury the seller, acting like a dick becomes less attractive. It proves the point, if you give everyone the same weapon, an armed society is a polite society. If we all have the ability to kick each other in the nuts, then using it to gain advantage no longer looks like a good idea, cuz you can get kicked in the nuts, too. Currently, the buyers hold a monopoly of reputation staining. It's the same thing as giving all your guns to politicians and expecting nothing bad will happen... Anyone given a monopoly on force will abuse it to their own advantage. If no one has that monopoly, no one has that advantage.
I choose not to be a dickhead even when I have the opportunity. Maybe I'm just more civilized than most. Maybe I expect my business partner is carrying a gun just like mine and it's not worth the chance... Whatever you choose to believe, putting the feedback weapon in everyone's hand would prevent abuse and extortion. Having a gun makes no one bullet-proof.
This is Reason Numero Uno why I don't have a seller account. SR is essentially handing a $500 credit card to a total stranger, and backing it with a 3rd party's money. This is broken.
If a Seller Account cost 33.3% of a buyer account, it would quickly become not worth it to besmirch and run.
Sellers could simply refuse to sell to noobs, etc. I guess they can do that now, but are put so far in the hole that they can't afford to turn away business, and the buyers abuse that to the hilt...
I hope people read this as your opinion and not a statement of fact as I can give you one fact about sellers accounts. The first auction winner, used his account for a month and managed to move $15,000 of MDMA and LSD. I don't know what his margins were but I'm pretty sure he comfortably handled the $150 charge for the account.
Me personally, I have bought about $3000 worth of product on here which means I have paid SR at least $180 in fees. If a buyers account is going to cost $150 could I get a $30 refund on the difference of SR fees I have already paid?
-
As for new buyers, if a new buyer really wants something I'm sure a reputable seller would be willing to do an out-of-escrow and vouch for them, that way the buyer can message any seller he wants to deal with and direct them to a forum topic where an established seller has said "all good here".
Buyers shouldn't have to do that kind of thing. Most buyers do not want to be part of the community, they just want to buy. Last time I checked there were close to 40k SR accounts. There are 2k accounts on this message board. Imagine if anyone who didn't have a message board account never signed up for SR. 95% fewer accounts. That's what would happen to your customer base. It would be a much bigger loss in revenue than the occasional fraud.
-
I agree, we need this.
SR is at risk of becoming an eBay. The buyers need a little skin in the game or it's all too easy to extort the sellers. The sellers are already fighting out of the hole after blowing $150 for an account. The then go into the hole on an escrowed product shipment. Volume is low in all but the major drug categories, so making your money back is damn hard to do. Then, the sellers can nit pick things they don't even understand or extort the seller? Pretend they never got the shipment? Lie about quality?
Sure, these ugly aspects of dirty humans cannot be negated. But if you can bury the would-be buyer the same way he can bury the seller, acting like a dick becomes less attractive. It proves the point, if you give everyone the same weapon, an armed society is a polite society. If we all have the ability to kick each other in the nuts, then using it to gain advantage no longer looks like a good idea, cuz you can get kicked in the nuts, too. Currently, the buyers hold a monopoly of reputation staining. It's the same thing as giving all your guns to politicians and expecting nothing bad will happen... Anyone given a monopoly on force will abuse it to their own advantage. If no one has that monopoly, no one has that advantage.
I choose not to be a dickhead even when I have the opportunity. Maybe I'm just more civilized than most. Maybe I expect my business partner is carrying a gun just like mine and it's not worth the chance... Whatever you choose to believe, putting the feedback weapon in everyone's hand would prevent abuse and extortion. Having a gun makes no one bullet-proof.
This is Reason Numero Uno why I don't have a seller account. SR is essentially handing a $500 credit card to a total stranger, and backing it with a 3rd party's money. This is broken.
If a Seller Account cost 33.3% of a buyer account, it would quickly become not worth it to besmirch and run.
Sellers could simply refuse to sell to noobs, etc. I guess they can do that now, but are put so far in the hole that they can't afford to turn away business, and the buyers abuse that to the hilt...
I hope people read this as your opinion and not a statement of fact as I can give you one fact about sellers accounts. The first auction winner, used his account for a month and managed to move $15,000 of MDMA and LSD. I don't know what his margins were but I'm pretty sure he comfortably handled the $150 charge for the account.
Me personally, I have bought about $3000 worth of product on here which means I have paid SR at least $180 in fees. If a buyers account is going to cost $150 could I get a $30 refund on the difference of SR fees I have already paid?
I wonder if you read my post...
1) Non-drug categories.
All other categories are very low volume.
2) 1/3 the cost of a seller account.
I never said that a buyer account should cost as much as a seller account. It has to cost just enough that using it to falsely degrade sellers is not worth wasting the money. $50 aughta do that. Maybe only $20. Is it worth it to the average asshole to blow $20 just to put a mark on someone for no reason at all? It's just a ballpark suggestion. I am not the boss. I guess it depends on how much you value being an asshole for no reason... One would have to be a very twisted peron to spend $50 just to badmouth some stranger they've never met, merely for the demented pleasure of having damaged them... There's no profit in it for anyone involved, and the doer of this deed actually takes a significant loss in the process.... I'd like to think few people on earth are that demented.
You missed these points it would seem, because you made flatly contrary statements about the content of my post.
Someone not involved in selling drugs would have a very hard time moving volume. His feedback would build very slowly, and he may end up floundering to the point that he never makes even that $150 back. It's part of why I haven't bought a seller account. I could sell some fairly common stuff, not illegal, int he electronics and computer equipment categories because I can sell it for cheaper than you can buy it anywhere else. There is probably a lot less stress involved, too.... ;-)
-
I just want to say, I'm REALLY pleased to see a bunch of constructive conversation in here. I knew not everyone would agree with my suggestion (and hell, to be honest, I'm not convinced 100% that my way is the right way), but I was half-afraid I'd log on here tonight to a bunch of flaming responses rather than actual ideas.
And, to reiterate, I HATE the idea of charging buyers for accounts. I already HATE the idea of charging sellers for accounts. I just don't what else can be done. The feedback situation is getting a little ridiculous, and it leaves me wondering how many other sellers like myself have cancelled sales on buyers who claimed not to receive just to avoid the negative feedback hit. I know I can't be the only one and it's just a small portion of the sellers that even come here. I just don't know see a lot of ways to fix the imbalance we've got going here.
I'd love to here more ideas than mine, though.
And I like the idea of buyer statistics. But the problem with that is the same two we have right now: it only works if you take it to resolution and it's documented AND it only works if the buyers can't just jump ship to another account. Why would a seller, who stands to lose maybe 50% of the bitcoin price AND get heavily-weighted negative feedback, take it to resolution just to document a bad buyer who's going to change accounts next time anyway? There's almost nothing to be gained there as a seller by taking it to resolution. As things are right now, I can say for certain I'm going to cancel the sale every time a buyer claims no delivery, and probably let another scam buyer go undocumented every time.
That SUCKS and it shouldn't be that way.
So, if someone's got an idea about how to avoid that without making buyers pay, lay it on us. Cause I can't figure one out.
-
Lol, I had to make a new account 3 times because I forgot my password and password recovery doesn't exist here. But you could just use the feedback to your advantage, kind of like banks with your credit rating. No credit == Bad credit. You can either refuse to sell to people with no feedback, or only sell them smaller quantities until you've earned each other's trust. This way just starting a new account sends the rotten apples back to square 1, having to prove themselves again. It can also be used in determining how resolutions are resolved. Trust a seller with boocoos of positive feedback more than a buyer with no, little, or bad feedback. And easily settle them half/half when trusted sellers and buyers have an 'item lost in mail' problem. It cannot be completely prevented, but making it harder to scam makes it less worth it to many would-be scammers.
(Yeah, i copy/pasted this from another post I made.... sorry!)
-
<snip>
And I like the idea of buyer statistics. But the problem with that is the same two we have right now: it only works if you take it to resolution and it's documented AND it only works if the buyers can't just jump ship to another account. Why would a seller, who stands to lose maybe 50% of the bitcoin price AND get heavily-weighted negative feedback, take it to resolution just to document a bad buyer who's going to change accounts next time anyway? There's almost nothing to be gained there as a seller by taking it to resolution. As things are right now, I can say for certain I'm going to cancel the sale every time a buyer claims no delivery, and probably let another scam buyer go undocumented every time.
That SUCKS and it shouldn't be that way.
So, if someone's got an idea about how to avoid that without making buyers pay, lay it on us. Cause I can't figure one out.
Sorry Colonel, but I'm afraid you *might* have bought yourself a bunch of scam buyers interest with that "no resolution center" comment. :(
The only new thing I can contribute to this *excellent* discussion is: has everyone thought about the fact that if the sellers could review the buying history of a buyer then they could reduce prices because they wouldn't be flying blind when deciding to take an order?
I agree that everyone prospers when both parties "have skin in the game". A modest buyer account fee ($20-50) and the most basic last 30-60-90 days of purchasing history with just the "total orders" and "resolution center" categories plus the date the buyer first purchased on SR is plenty of info for an experienced seller to evaluate their risk on normal sized ($100-500) orders.
I also think the resistance to the buyers account fee would be minimal. After all, SR is now world famous, any new buyer who comes to the forum will certainly realize that mass quantities of product are being delivered. And the entirety of the SR community would be better off without the XX thousand persons who signed up but will never buy from SR; not even once! Over time the prices would drift down as the sellers perception of the risks abated to the point they felt they were minimal...which by then they would be
-
I'm all for buyer fb but not charging us for an a/c.
-
I wonder if you read my post...
1) Non-drug categories.
All other categories are very low volume.
2) 1/3 the cost of a seller account.
I never said that a buyer account should cost as much as a seller account. It has to cost just enough that using it to falsely degrade sellers is not worth wasting the money. $50 aughta do that. Maybe only $20. Is it worth it to the average asshole to blow $20 just to put a mark on someone for no reason at all? It's just a ballpark suggestion. I am not the boss. I guess it depends on how much you value being an asshole for no reason... One would have to be a very twisted peron to spend $50 just to badmouth some stranger they've never met, merely for the demented pleasure of having damaged them... There's no profit in it for anyone involved, and the doer of this deed actually takes a significant loss in the process.... I'd like to think few people on earth are that demented.
You missed these points it would seem, because you made flatly contrary statements about the content of my post.
Someone not involved in selling drugs would have a very hard time moving volume. His feedback would build very slowly, and he may end up floundering to the point that he never makes even that $150 back. It's part of why I haven't bought a seller account. I could sell some fairly common stuff, not illegal, int he electronics and computer equipment categories because I can sell it for cheaper than you can buy it anywhere else. There is probably a lot less stress involved, too.... ;-)
The problem I have with threads such as this, is that it is a request to appeal to the lowest common denominator. Just like the recent threads from some sellers with their "woe is me someone gave me a 4/5", suck it up people. Your transaction(s) that you complain about are a poofteenth of the amount of transactions that happen through the site.
I'll repeat the statement that has been made before "THIS ISN'T EBAY, YOU ARE BUYING ILLEGAL GOODS" I know many ebay sellers strive for 100% feedback but perhaps here, an excellent seller is someone over 95%.
In regards to paying for buyers account, my points are that it is double dipping, (hey just like ebay and paypal) and that it will reduce the amount of sales through the site. A SR fees credit system is feasible but any site that asks for upfront payment before charging ongoing fees will not be as successful as the current site format.
-
honestly i think charging for a buyers account would start a boycott of the silk road.
so say we put buyer feedback in, without charging for accounts, the bad thing about that is, what is stopping them from opening multiple accounts? nothing.
i dont see any way that we can meet in the middle here.
but if i we did start a whole buyer feedback thing, even if it was free, it would be a great first step.
a seller could claim(if he was paranoid enough) that he has the right to refuse service to any buyer without rep, so he would decrease the chances of being scammed.
in the end, we will end up with the trusted buyers having good feedback so they would be respected and no one would worry.
but again i raise the point of trolls making tons of small purchases to gain good rep, then fucking over someone big time; repeat by making new seller account...
:/
-
What if we had the ability to comment on negative feedback? Then people can at least hear both sides. Then we fix the feedback system a bit. I guess it doesn't strike at the heart of the issue - but I feel I would lose more customers from people having to buy accounts vs one troll or two troll feedbacks in my reviews.
Peace,
DigitalAlch
-
...
but again i raise the point of trolls making tons of small purchases to gain good rep, then fucking over someone big time; repeat by making new seller account...
:/
You've got a valid concern here. I recently exchanged a few PM's with one of my favorite buyers; he mentioned that since joining SR he's had a record number of orders that supposedly never arrived. That rarely happened on the other forum he sold from.
So we could have scammers making tons of small purchases to look good, and then claiming their really big order never arrived. But doing this would create a suspicious pattern of many successful deliveries of small orders followed by an expensive order that supposedly never arrived. The seller and SR admins would have to be curious about what happened.
Perhaps a form of insurance could be implemented. Let's say for a big order, where the seller stands to lose a lot if the order mysteriously never arrives, a few extra bitcoins are added to the purchase price. If the order arrives safely then the amount of insurance is refunded to the buyer. If the buyer claims that the order never arrived then any refund demanded would be based on the cost of the order plus the insurance paid.
So, if a buyer placed a big order valued at 30 bitcoins, plus 5 bitcoins for insurance (a total of 35 bitcoins), and then claimed the order never arrived, arbitration would be based on the value of 35 bitcoins. The SR admin could look at this situation and say "Well, the buyer had received all these other orders, but didn't get the last order. That's doesn't fit the delivery pattern of this buyer." Then the SR admin could refund just a percentage of the order, say 25 percent, to the buyer. In this case the seller would still get 26.25 bitcoins. Or if the SR admin just splits the amount, seller and buyer would get 17.5 bitcoins each.
I mention insurance because any seller who's been burned by non-delivery claims WILL start to increase their selling price somewhat to cover the chance of loss. Keep this in mind the next time you view a long-time seller's listings and ask "Damn, why is this stuff so expensive?"
-
YES on buyer feedback!!!
LE and competition can too easily troll feedback and claim they never received product.
I don't know if buying buyer accounts is necessary, as that might reduce business. I'd rather have a system where as a seller you could list certain products as available only to buyers with high feedback. That way, sellers can do small quantities to anyone, but larger amounts would only be available to buyers with a proven track record.
-
YES on buyer feedback!!!
LE and competition can too easily troll feedback and claim they never received product.
I don't know if buying buyer accounts is necessary, as that might reduce business. I'd rather have a system where as a seller you could list certain products as available only to buyers with high feedback. That way, sellers can do small quantities to anyone, but larger amounts would only be available to buyers with a proven track record.
This is a great feature, being able to choose minimum completed transactions. Or, in the case of my anonymous buyer feedback where you list Disputed transactions/Total transactions, you could choose a minimum complete % along with a minimum buying history. this would be awesome.
-
Okay, consensus is yes to buyer feedback and feedback response and no to charging for buyer accounts. I agree that even without charging for buyer accounts we still need buyer feedback and feedback response either way, even if buyers can still change accounts at will. It will still help a little.
But that still doesn't get around the problem of buyers claiming they didn't receive goods and sellers just cancelling the order to avoid the negative feedback. Because even with buyer feedback, there still isn't much incentive as a seller to go to resolution unless it was just a gigantic order or something where you can't stand to lose all the Bitcoins.
So how do you fix THAT without charging for buyer accounts? I can't figure it out.
The ONLY thing I can think of is that a seller should be able to leave buyer feedback on a cancelled order, but the buyer should NOT--because the seller has no incentive to feedback troll buyers the way buyers will with sellers and the seller is already forfeiting all the Bitcoin in this case. And then it would at least be documented that the buyer claimed non-receipt AND why the order was cancelled. Or, at very least, there needs to be some kind of running log of cancelled orders on the buyer's account page with feedback from the seller for why the order was cancelled (I know that raises privacy concerns though).
But, there again, that's all pretty useless when the buyer can just make a new account and go down the line with the next seller and scam him too. There's just really no getting around that.
Scam buyers are going to be able to scam EVERY seller at least once. That sucks, especially if we get several of them here over time.
-
And another slightly related topic: when a buyer lets an order auto-finalize and doesn't leave feedback, do they then have the ability to leave feedback on that order FOREVER?
Because if so, I think a buyer should lose the ability to leave feedback on that order if they let it auto-finalize.
The buyers letting orders auto-finalize thing is really starting to piss me off, too, and I'd REALLY like to blackball any buyer who lets an order auto-finalize. But I'm scared to do it if they have that blank check to get me back with the feedback they didn't leave at the time.
-
Like I said before, charge 10 or 20 bitcoins for a user account but that money is put in said account. it can be used to purchase items. it cannot be transferred out into another account. that way, they would be forced to do multiple purchases from one account. and making multiple accounts would be a pain. plus, they would get all their money back to purchase items...
Also, make it so that a new user can only do one transaction at a time til he reaches 2 or 3 successful transactions.. Im just spitballing. giving some ideas...
-
And another slightly related topic: when a buyer lets an order auto-finalize and doesn't leave feedback, do they then have the ability to leave feedback on that order FOREVER?
Because if so, I think a buyer should lose the ability to leave feedback on that order if they let it auto-finalize.
The buyers letting orders auto-finalize thing is really starting to piss me off, too, and I'd REALLY like to blackball any buyer who lets an order auto-finalize. But I'm scared to do it if they have that blank check to get me back with the feedback they didn't leave at the time.
I have a couple like this and im just glad it was hedged. It really pisses me off.. I have sent them multiple messages. I know that they have received, yet i have to wait x more days. I hope that they cant come back on and give me negative feeback, that would suck..
-
I think there should be some sort of system for when nothing is received. I have bought stuff from SR before and it is sent using postage pre-paid online... So the seller has proof of the item being dispatched, but at the same time the buyers address gets stored most likely forever on the Royal Mail website. Not really in the spirit of SR. I have sent all my orders out using the correct stamps. Much safer for the buyer, much less safe for me because I have no proof it was sent.
Having a system where someone can just make an account, order something and then claim it wasn't received and receive a full refund from SR with no questions asked is doomed to fail as SR gains more publicity and attracts unsavory people. Silk Road needs a mechanism in place to stop this happening, if not people will just switch over to one of the many clones that are springing up. Surely the commission we pay is capable of funding more elaborate code.
-
Also, I wont do bigger orders outside of the escrow system. It would suck to have a few hundred dollars in product and maybe get 50 percent of my money back 20 some odd days later. Thats why I offer 2 systems. one within escrow, they can only purchase a limited amount and one without escrow, they can purchase as many as i have available. Its the only thing that will guarantee me 100 percent from being scammed on bigger orders. So far, its worked great...
-
...
Having a system where someone can just make an account, order something and then claim it wasn't received and receive a full refund from SR with no questions asked is doomed to fail as SR gains more publicity and attracts unsavory people. Silk Road needs a mechanism in place to stop this happening, if not people will just switch over to one of the many clones that are springing up. Surely the commission we pay is capable of funding more elaborate code.
In my experience the system doesn't work that way at all. I ordered from a SR seller who had a good rep at the time but it took about 3 weeks for my order to arrive, even after it had been marked "In Transit" just a day after placing the order. The SR admin was totally on the seller's side, and just wrote to say I should wait and eventually my order would probably arrive.
My order did eventually arrive, but if things had gone to arbitration I'm sure I would have gotten only a fraction of a refund.
FYI, this seller went on to turn into a total scammer -- there was at least one thread about him by frustrated buyers, and his current buyer comments are all about non-delivery.
-
"especially with the unfriendly new seller rating system" I agree with that, but if we make buyers buy their own account I don't think many people will join. It's very hard for people to get bitcoins at first. And to do that initially to acquire an account will act as a major deterrent for new Silkies.
-
I don't know how many buyers would be willing to pay for an account, and someone who bought an account is not necessarily less likely to scam a seller; if the value of the product exceeds that of the cost of the account, scamming would still be profitable for larger orders.
Perhaps we could require a deposit to become a buyer, which would be refunded once they receive X number and/or % positive buyer feedback. This wouldn't eliminate scammers but it would provide an incentive for buyers to continue striving for positive feedback.
-
Like I said before, charge 10 or 20 bitcoins for a user account but that money is put in said account. it can be used to purchase items. it cannot be transferred out into another account. that way, they would be forced to do multiple purchases from one account. and making multiple accounts would be a pain. plus, they would get all their money back to purchase items...
Also, make it so that a new user can only do one transaction at a time til he reaches 2 or 3 successful transactions.. Im just spitballing. giving some ideas...
What is wrong with this idea? That way, the user still gets to use his bitcoins but is forced to keep the same username for atleast a couple transactions. (Unless its big enough to take the whole thing) Also, I think vendors should be able to rate buyers. Being able to make a new identity on every purchase really opens a door to scammers.
-
Like I said before, charge 10 or 20 bitcoins for a user account but that money is put in said account. it can be used to purchase items. it cannot be transferred out into another account. that way, they would be forced to do multiple purchases from one account. and making multiple accounts would be a pain. plus, they would get all their money back to purchase items...
Also, make it so that a new user can only do one transaction at a time til he reaches 2 or 3 successful transactions.. Im just spitballing. giving some ideas...
What is wrong with this idea? That way, the user still gets to use his bitcoins but is forced to keep the same username for atleast a couple transactions. (Unless its big enough to take the whole thing) Also, I think vendors should be able to rate buyers. Being able to make a new identity on every purchase really opens a door to scammers.
That's kind of what I was getting at with the refundable deposit idea. The buyer would need to acquire an arbitrary #/$ value of positive feedback before the deposit is refunded.
-
Like I said before, charge 10 or 20 bitcoins for a user account but that money is put in said account. it can be used to purchase items. it cannot be transferred out into another account. that way, they would be forced to do multiple purchases from one account. and making multiple accounts would be a pain. plus, they would get all their money back to purchase items...
That's the answer. RIGHT THERE. You're a genius. I didn't realize what you were getting at before.
Don't charge buyers, but make their first so-much Bitcoin they deposit un-refundable. They'd still be able to scam a seller or two, but at least it would cost them SOMETHING and discourage it.
-
Like I said before, charge 10 or 20 bitcoins for a user account but that money is put in said account. it can be used to purchase items. it cannot be transferred out into another account. that way, they would be forced to do multiple purchases from one account. and making multiple accounts would be a pain. plus, they would get all their money back to purchase items...
That's the answer. RIGHT THERE. You're a genius. I didn't realize what you were getting at before.
Don't charge buyers, but make their first so-much Bitcoin they deposit un-refundable. They'd still be able to scam a seller or two, but at least it would cost them SOMETHING and discourage it.
I like that idea, so the buyer wouldn't have to waste money on buying an account because I'm sure that would discourage people.
-
Like I said before, charge 10 or 20 bitcoins for a user account but that money is put in said account. it can be used to purchase items. it cannot be transferred out into another account. that way, they would be forced to do multiple purchases from one account. and making multiple accounts would be a pain. plus, they would get all their money back to purchase items...
That's the answer. RIGHT THERE. You're a genius. I didn't realize what you were getting at before.
Don't charge buyers, but make their first so-much Bitcoin they deposit un-refundable. They'd still be able to scam a seller or two, but at least it would cost them SOMETHING and discourage it.
I like that idea, so the buyer wouldn't have to waste money on buying an account because I'm sure that would discourage people.
I mean, SR started charging for sellers accounts and that money is gone. I see this a very viable solution. Buyers are going to deposit money anyways. This way, most buyers would be forced to use all their bitcoins before making a new account. It won't solve all issues, but I think its a good first step to thwart reverse scams. Not only do this, but also have a rating system. That way seller number 2 knows what experience seller number 1 had. It just makes it much more difficult for a buyer to scam, but yet it shouldn't hinder buyers to come on board.
-
I'm bumping this conversation up because SR really needs to add this as protection for vendors.
LE DOES make many purchases on here to examine vendors' packages and products, and when they do they generally leave shitty feedback cause they're douchebag cops.
I don't think people need to pay to become buyers. If scam buyers create new accounts to avoid past negative feedback, vendors can just avoid people with little feedback history, or at least regulate them to small trial purchases.
-
At some point SR is going to be flooded with mainstream newbies. This is a Dual Edged Sword that will cut deep both ways. I have been on very popular Forums where once a max number of Subscribers are on board, membership becomes Exclusive. However, if your willing to make a "Donation" you are bumped up on the wait list. Numbers and Law of Statistics dont Lie. The greater the population of Buyers, the more likely you increase odds of getting an LE or a Scammer. I'm still a Newbie, but I have a good handful of trouble free exchanges and my plan is to keep it that way. I wouldnt be opposed to Paying to be say a Silver Member, Gold Member or Platinum based on how I conduct myself.
-
Like I said before, charge 10 or 20 bitcoins for a user account but that money is put in said account. it can be used to purchase items. it cannot be transferred out into another account. that way, they would be forced to do multiple purchases from one account. and making multiple accounts would be a pain. plus, they would get all their money back to purchase items...
That sum would have to be placed in hedge... which is a slightly costly service (although not much).
I'm also not sure I see how this redeemable deposit would solve the problem. Say I create an account, deposit the required funds and make a purchase. I can still claim to not have received the package and request a refund (using the threat of negative feedback if necessary), the usual scamming way. I may get negative feedback but I can simply create a new account and start over...
That is, unless the deposit is LARGE in the first place, but this would deter buyers and thus hurt the market as a whole.
If what you mean is: even refunded funds can't be withdrawn, then this is closer to a refundable deposit... which doesn't protect the buyer from malicious sellers.
So far the suggestions are: redeemable deposit, refundable deposit (when a feedback/purchase requirement is met), or fixed deposit, all of which have issues.
The beauty of the Escrow system is its simplicity, I believe anything else bears the risk of driving buyers away.
There is another solution which is to introduce some form of insurance (the rate of which decreases with good feedback), but this would be hard to implement without good enough statistical data. I would love for sellers to come forward with some detailed estimates of how much scamming is impacting their gross profit.
-
if i had to pay for a buyer account i'd pretty damn diappointed so far lol and i'd really like to see where some of sellers feedback is coming from!
-
Having done multiple transactions totaling over $1000, probably more, of products, I hope I am qualified to throw my two cents in here. I read all the replies and ideas and there seems to be one idea no one has brought forward.
First, let me say yes, yes, yes to buyer feedback. This allows a seller to see how many successful transactions a buyer has completed, and how many have gone to resolution or they have claimed they did not receive. A buyer could determine if they wanted to do business or simply cancel the order.
Now, let me float this idea. Why not a level system for new buyers? When a new account is opened, you must complete at least five, or maybe more, transactions before you are available for escrow to protect your money. If you are a new buyer, you should be dealing with sellers that have excellent ratings for the products you want. When you purchase, the transaction would be finalized automatically and only the seller could refund or cancel the transaction. SR or the sellers could even apply limits to the amounts that could be ordered initially for their protection. Once you have met a predetermined number of transactions that have completed successfully, you now have escrow available. This way, your buyer feedback has time to develop and sellers can see if you are trustworthy. I think this would seriously limit the number of scammers, as anyone who first-time orders and then says they didn't receive the order would only get a refund if the seller felt they deserved it. Most businesses reserve the right to refuse service or refunds for any reason, so how would this be any different? However, the new buyer could still potentially order from other sellers, complete some transactions, and build up positive feedback to show they are honest.
I really hate to finalize early for sellers, but will do it when it is the first time I have bought from them to show them I am trustworthy, but that opens me up to being scammed and defeats the purpose of escrow. If there was a buyer feedback, then those sellers could check mine, see I don't scam, and proceed with the transaction without asking me to finalize early. If I do it now, I tell them it will be the only time and don't ask me to do it in the future. If they can't agree to that, then cancel the order and I won't be back.
I think this system will work. What do you think about it? Can my idea be improved upon? Let's get the buyer feedback on here and fast.
Simpatico
-
I think escrow should be there for everyone, that's kinda the point. I really don't like the finalizing early trend because it could potentially skew the recent feedback of the seller to positive despite the fact that he's a potential scammer and once again defeats the purpose of escrow. I think that most, not all but most, of the issues involving scam buyers can be solved by just including tracking on every package, that way, if a buyer tries to scam all the vendor has to do is just show the tracking number in resolution and the scam buyer gets his money justly taken.
What I would love to see is a buyer feedback system where vendors comment and leave feedback on their experience with the buyer. It would be very easy to implement and would be extraordinarily more useful than just the statistics, after all, there are no better lies than statistics.
As for buyer's buying accounts, I'm pretty ambivalent here, a small fee wouldn't kill any of us who spend hundreds or even thousands of dollars on here and SR does deserve it and it would it would deter at least some scam buyers, but it's more money out of my pocket so... yeah, no strong feelings here.
-
...suppose simpatico's suggestion might (or not...) help....
there is a danger that costs spiral out of control and / or simply pass on the cost to the buyer who is already paying unjustified amts for drugs.
it won't stop the scammer paying his $20 or whatever for the a/c and then ripping someone off.
letting money determine who can be trusted or not is also a contradiction in itself. security is also a factor, the enemy has money.
-
Making people pay for buyer accounts will just mean that the scammers will be better funded (LE).
All SR has to do is add buyer feedback so people can see what other vendors experienced. I know that would have prevented how I got scammed.
-
Facts
Dealers/Vendors - Being a vendor, on here or RL, you always, I mean ALWAYS run the risk of getting ripped off, period. There isn't one single dealer here who hasn't been ripped off at some point or another in their dealing career, whether it is in real life, or on SR. We also run the risk of getting busted, on SR and real life. This is the nature of the beast, this is the risks we take every single day.
Buyers/Consumers - Being a consumer, on here or RL, you always, I mean ALWAYS run the risk of getting ripped off, period. There isn't one single consumer here who hasn't been ripped off at some point or another in their consumer career, whether it is in real life, or on SR. We also run the risk of getting busted, on SR and real life. This is the nature of the beast, this is the risks we take every single day.
Now...those facts are exactly, word for word 99% the same, switch out the words vendors and consumers is the only difference. That means that we are 99% exactly the same type of people...that 1% is the label that is stamped on us and is the difference. We are a community of consumers, vendors, junkies, heads, burn outs, party people, tweakers, geekers, nodders, hippies, thugs, straights, homosexuals, bisexuals, metrosexuals, city people, country folk, whites, african americans, hispanics, asians, indians, blah blah blah blah, the list could go on and on and I am sure you get the idea. That is something we can all agree on. There is another that we can agree on as well...scammers suck and should be castrated lol. This is a problem that should be fixed sure, but there isn't really a fool proof system that can be used thus far. I agree that a buyer feedback implement is a super grand idea and (as a buyer) would absolutely love...I am brand new to the SR scene (a member for about 2 weeks now) and just made my first 3 purchases over the course of the last 2 days. Being a consumer, I went out on a limb to purchase a product from someone who I have only spoken to via the SR messaging system and the forums, but ya know, they went out on a limb for me too. I guess what I am trying to say is that we are all equal and therefore there should be a buyer feedback system implemented. I may also be willing to buy an account but I don't think I would pay the $150, maybe $50 or so tops. This is a beautiful and wonderful community and should not be polluted or destroyed under any circumstances unless of course it is something completely outside of our control. SR is one of the most fascinating things invented and we should not tarnish it anymore than it already has. Lets weed out the scammers and take back our freedom that once was our taboo lifestyles of buying and selling substances! lol
Thank you! 8)
-
..sure thing,,,
...i dont see where the buyers feedback is...!?
-
buyer only here.
i am very in favor of sellers leaving feedback for their buyers. i pride myself on professionally dealing with my vendors - no bullshit, and i'd like prospective vendors and current vendors to be see that i conduct myself responsibly 100% of the time.
-
Only new buyer accounts should cost money. Current buyer's shouldn't have to pay (grandfathered in). I don't think seller's who already had accounts had to pay. With buyer feedback the current scammers will be exposed soon enough and it will cost them to open new accounts.
It's impossible to stop scamming without making the site so restrictive that few will join. I think the new buyer's should get their money back after so much time. Scammers I imagine are impatient to get their money. Make new buyer's wait a month or three before getting their security deposit refunded. It's hard to prevent the scammers who place some small to medium sized orders to establish credibility before ripping off a few big orders.
Comparing buyer and seller stats is another good idea. It's much more likely for the new buyer or seller to be scamming than an established one. Resolution and feedback should reflect that.
If seller's can already see who left each feedback then it isn't anonymous since they can post the info in public forums for anyone to read.
I don't like finalizing early but understand why sellers request it from new buyers or for bulk orders to prevent getting ripped off. So far the only btc I lost was because I finalized early for international shipping.
-
{...perhaps....some good points...}
"scamming" works both ways....there are some posts here...squabbling about receiving empty parcels etc...
yes thats my big concern, effect any of this has on being a legit new joiner {=potential business} and whether this would actually help iron out scammers or merely expect money to sort it = quick fix...
part of the end solution is to verify the anonymous user (buyer & seller) using the forum as it stands (?) with security beef'd up a bit etc...
you can still verify the user is the same user w/o compromising security long term. (ie open another a/c and try the same stunt...aside from making everyone pay for a/c's)
-
My original suggestion on this issue, going back months, was the one that SR adopted. Buyer stats showing completed transactions and a refund issue rate. This has allowed sellers to put up benchmarks for buyers and enact protections we didnt' really have the option of recommending. I'm happy to say that since these stats came out, I have not been scammed ONCE on over 150 transactions.
If we wanted to enhance it a bit, the next step would be to add on an "autofinalize %". This would cover all non-disputed transactions, since refund rates would go into a different category. This is essentially the last piece of buyer feedback a good seller needs. This would allow us to discriminate on how active our customers are at completing their end of the deal. That has been my only complaint since the buyer stats were implemented - I have a mostly awesome group of customers, but a few of the one-offs or very rare buyers often let it go to autofinalize. I would rather be able to say "hey, if your autofinalize rate is over 10%, I can't do "normal" business with you. I have this option you can check out, and if not there are other sellers I'm sure would want to deal with you." - If not, it encourages buyers to keep on top of things without taking anything away from them or putting a proverbial gun in their ribs.
The sellers with the highest volumes and best ratings are the ones that work hard to make sure our customers are getting good product at a good price and as safely as possible. I look for buyers to comment on my shipping just as much as my product quality, because it doesn't matter if you have the best product on the planet - if you are packaging like an ignorant ass, your customer is not getting it at best, and is at worst now at high risk of being on the brunt end of the state's billy-club. The best sellers also attract the best customers - a scammer can look at a seller with a low feedback rating and say "hey, this guy is hurting for business. He is more likely to take the bait, and at the least I'll get a 50% discount on some decent weed". It's also up to us, as sellers, by keeping the standards of our business as high as possible, to attract the good guys. if someone tries to scam me, I can say to SR "hey, the last 100 transactions I did have 0 issues. This guy, who has been here for all of 3 transactions, MAY have lost his package, but the numbers aren't exactly in his favor". A potential scammer will know this going into the transaction. It's not worth his time to try to rip off one of the good guys, because he gets less chance at a take.
I think buyers buying their accounts wouldn't change much. And not for the fact that some like to jump on the old "LE" bandwagon, because that horse has been flogged near-death with zero substance behind that whip. It would just keep buyers away. We want the community to grow.
It's up to everybody to kind of watch everybody, to assume all of the time that there is a chance you are talking to someone who could hurt you. But there is also an equal chance that you are talking to someone whose life you can benefit by offering them products they have a hard time finding (or might get beaten and robbed in the process of acquiring), or whose family you can feed by doing some business with them. This is a community. It's not a "buyers vs. sellers" thing. We all benefit from each other, but we all have to keep each other accountable.
-
hi,
Yes this is what i exactly want and started before a topic about it before in Feature requests section :
I Propose a Silkroad Buy account (Fee) Commission entering Silkroad.
Link:http://dkn255hz262ypmii.onion/index.php?topic=4025.15
And also what i want added to the feature feedback is also a 5/5 ratting about the buyer like:
1) Placing Order = Correct address info field
2) Communication = Reply on time of Vendors pm
3) Order Finalization = ( waiting for releasing escrow)
4) Behavior and attitude = Respect
5) Trustful and Reliable = Fair trade ( Refund rate %)
This information is important so when a buyer puts a order then only the vendors can see this information and have the right then to know if the buyer is legit or not to do business with.
If you have suggestion to add or correct things then please let my know..how more brains how more ideas and how more we can solve the problems about buyers scamming etc.
Greets DutchShop,
-
....if thats the buyer rating how are sellers to be rated?
...for example one of the quarms is also can't respond to messages or point 4 above..
???
-
Hi,
I was wonder if it is possible to put this topic in the Technical » Feature requests (Section).
I let this up to the topic starter = Colonel Sanders
Greets DutchShop,
-
Hi,
This is just an idea of the 5/5 feedback for buyers because there is already a 5/5 feedback for Vendors so why not a counter measure to keep it in balance and fair.
At this moment it's not fair and in balance because the buyers can give bad or good feedback about Vendors but vendors don't have really tools like buyers feedback to know if a buyer is really legit or not.
The information about buyers feedback can only seen at the moment that a buyer puts a order (Vendor Order Window Section) so what means the buyers feedback information and history can't been seen by other buyers to keep it safe and secure.
Greets DutchShop,
....if thats the buyer rating how are sellers to be rated?
???
-
I'm not sure it's in our best interest, as sellers, to make it "fair" by adding buyer feedback.
We are the ones who are really expected to show perfect behaviour here, not the buyers. Buyers certainly aren't spending as much time, or are as knowledgeable about the site, the etiquette, etc. as us. We cannot hold them to the same standards.
For instance, if I had to rate some (a few) buyers, I couldn't possibly give them 5/5 on their readiness to release escrow (c'mon, the guy lives in the same country as I do, my packages get there in 24hrs but my money has been sitting for 10 days) but otherwise, they're cool folks, always giving me 5/5 with nice feedback. I don't want to hurt their feelings or get them angry or whatever. And that's not necessarily unfair to other perfect buyers, since at the end of the day, they're the ones who get extra stuff, or lower prices, or tips on how to use the product, etc.
-
i wonder what the other points of view are? ...i'll reply later...
{all i seek is a fair deal for everyone...}
-
...waiting for comments for what admins are going to want to do...
-
We definitely don't need buyer feedback that can be left by the seller. That's just a way for sellers to hostage buyers (i.e. if you don't leave good feedback on me, I'm going to leave bad feedback on your as a buyer). The sellers that constantly complain about getting bad feedback try to blame scammers, trolls, etc. I don't random bad feedback, or bad feedback in general. This is not random, and it's not luck. Other top vendors aren't on the forums complaining about bad feedback, they are just doing a damned good job and customers are letting them know their appreciation.
Why do sellers want buyer feedback? To see how a buyer is to do business with. What information do you need to see if you want to do business with a buyer? You need to know if they are going to release funds to you (i.e. not try to scam you), and you also need to know if they are going to be timely about finishing off the transaction. You can already see if they are a scammer or complainer - the numbers are there for that. The only additional thing you need to know is as simple as an autofinalize %. That tells you if a buyer is active and willing to wrap things up and make the whole ride a smooth one, or if they are not very active on the site or lazy or just an ass.
You don't need anything more than that. To add more just puts more limitations on the community and opens up doors for different types of conflict. buyer feedback is unnecessary and will do more harm than good.
-
OK, Ill Admit, i got tired of reading all 5 pages of post. I Hope this hasn't already been suggested but here is my 2 cents.
I have only purchased a few things on sr but so far both have gone good. I think that a good way to, at the very least, promote good buyer accounts may be to jack your prices up a bit and promote preferred customer discounts. I can see how this might not keep people from scamming but it might help. I also know alot of Black market industries that i have delt with that require references, or even as someone posted before, needing a invite to join sr. I really think with reference requirements or preferred customers you guys as buyers could start and pick and choose your buyers better. I know I wouldn't want to give a reference to a seller if it would look bad on me and even possibly baring me from a seller.
-
..so wouldnt 'thought / a bit of effort put into packaging"....not important say....
...there are a few other "ratings" from what everyone else has posted as quarms or good points, so if a buyer is going to be rated by "attitude" then surely that works both ways?! -particularly with 'no communication'...
the way i think of it is like ebay .
-
so feedback is supposed to be positive reflection on how well either party is doing at their job (whatever):
buyer suggestions:
quality reflected as a trend rather than a mean average per product.
packaging effort / skill at concealing the product {haha}
communication promptness
willingness to compensate {?! ..rewording}
{shipping success is a difficult one....cos as we know is influenced by either party..}
seller feedback suggestions:
user communication [promptness]
user "politeness"
payment rating [less shipping delays...]
purchase "trending" over last few mths...
auto-finalising rate
any more and think might be unnecesary...
any further suggestions?
-
I'm not sure it's in our best interest, as sellers, to make it "fair" by adding buyer feedback.
We are the ones who are really expected to show perfect behaviour here, not the buyers. Buyers certainly aren't spending as much time, or are as knowledgeable about the site, the etiquette, etc. as us. We cannot hold them to the same standards.
For instance, if I had to rate some (a few) buyers, I couldn't possibly give them 5/5 on their readiness to release escrow (c'mon, the guy lives in the same country as I do, my packages get there in 24hrs but my money has been sitting for 10 days) but otherwise, they're cool folks, always giving me 5/5 with nice feedback. I don't want to hurt their feelings or get them angry or whatever. And that's not necessarily unfair to other perfect buyers, since at the end of the day, they're the ones who get extra stuff, or lower prices, or tips on how to use the product, etc.
..somehow i dont relate to these points above...
everyone is expected to conduct themselves in the proper fashion..
..in business the seller always has to set the good example cos its their job function in that field and visa versa when the ex-buyer is at his/her job that conduct themselves accordingly otherwise there are consequences, perhaps the customer is always right point does go too far but then shops/business do provide shit service and still expect top dollar -"cos thats the going rate" bs......and thats why customers go elsewhere (not talking about SR here...generic...} ...we all experience that.
once a buyer/user has been around run up a purchasing history they obviously learn how things work comes with experience...its not always the "user's" fault he
doesn't know how the self checkout / restaurant works when they walk in the front door....same for SR, we may or may not find the magic forum post that describes how whatever works....largely down to how data is organised / search ability etc...
-
Now, let me float this idea. Why not a level system for new buyers? When a new account is opened, you must complete at least five, or maybe more, transactions before you are available for escrow to protect your money. If you are a new buyer, you should be dealing with sellers that have excellent ratings for the products you want. When you purchase, the transaction would be finalized automatically and only the seller could refund or cancel the transaction. SR or the sellers could even apply limits to the amounts that could be ordered initially for their protection. Once you have met a predetermined number of transactions that have completed successfully, you now have escrow available. This way, your buyer feedback has time to develop and sellers can see if you are trustworthy. I think this would seriously limit the number of scammers, as anyone who first-time orders and then says they didn't receive the order would only get a refund if the seller felt they deserved it. Most businesses reserve the right to refuse service or refunds for any reason, so how would this be any different? However, the new buyer could still potentially order from other sellers, complete some transactions, and build up positive feedback to show they are honest.
I've actually started a bit of a side project that incorporates that to be used with SR. It's essentially a system that creates an effective web of trust for new buyers through features built into PGP so first time or newer buyers will be pointed to a good vendor assuring they learn the ropes well intially so they avoid scammers from the selling side and if they have this product they will be identified as participating invested buyers it's essentially designed like the bitcoin-otc web of trust model used for buying btc in IRC.
I think it's also important for vendors to be able to identify problem or buyers that would otherwise appear to be prone or intending to defraud a vendor. Perhaps maybe some sort of summary of any case that went to resulotion center nothing more than a drop down selection for how it was resolved, maybe
'seller/vendor agreed to X% refund but otherwise agreeable' so if there is a refund it's details are kept between the vendor and the seller but the outcome is available in some objective way for the future vendors to read?
-
Most businesses reserve the right to refuse service or refunds for any reason, so how would this be any different?
-because they are either b-grade stock / special offers / end-of-line / consumable goods
-its different also because this isn't a physical store and anonymous -to have to trust someone you've never met, will never meet...
-
I'm such a strong advocate for buyer feedback.
Its rather weird to think that there isn't one in place already, it would be so easy to implement.
I don't think a buyer would/should ever buy an account so they can use SR... that's just stupid. I understand what you are trying to get at, but you're going about it all wrong. I think an invite only system would work better.
I personally have a shit list on my wall of people I will not do business with. Number one is that asshole minioreo1234. The only rating under 5/5 I've ever gotten and he did it because he didn't want to pay an international shipping fee. I never even did business with the guy and he ruined my rating! Talk about bullshit...
-
What if we had the ability to comment on negative feedback? Then people can at least hear both sides. Then we fix the feedback system a bit. I guess it doesn't strike at the heart of the issue - but I feel I would lose more customers from people having to buy accounts vs one troll or two troll feedbacks in my reviews.
Peace,
DigitalAlch
'ello
nice to hear admins feedback with these pages and pages of ideas, very good ideas but still ...a lot to get thru....as similar ideas are raised on other threads.
...am reading thru this thread, and am trying to process everyone's thoughts cos i too would like to see an end solution competitively priced good gear where everyone here is happy; dont quite know how to put it down in a paragraph just yet working on it.
Travelling Without Moving
-
"guest status" user --x months--> normal user status .. ..
from 0-x purchase feedback expected 10>= feedback (?)
intro a/c cost +- $20
purchase <= $20/20 euro (=cost) possibile intro of deposit a/c value $60 (?)
guest a/c's:
new a/c's require the $20/20 euro and purchases kept below $21 to hep prevent scamming opportunities, although sellers
can opt out of the "rule" at their own risk. {feedback may need to reflect this if occurs..}
facilitates new joiners w/o shifting loss to any sellers or existing users/buyers.
problem users can be terminated at any time and deposit is non-refundable (?)
guest users can continue to use their own usernames (no generic guest user needed)
benefits are minimal changes to the simple machines forum / profile.
normal user a/c's:
$60 helps prevent user exiting guest status and pull off a scam of large order the moment status changes to "normal"
decision to be taken what to do with existing buyer a/c's.
status change from guest --> normal is just a change on user profile or automated (?)
what above doesn't address or prevent;-
whether to restructure feedback as it currently stands {seems advisable}
existing LE's "in the system" / already registered. {hoped additional security perhaps addresses this..?!}
doesn't prevent a rogue seller from pulling a scam themselves esp on new joiners, although the a/c fee should deter this.
additional security still needs investigation and implemented. ie dongles, user & pgp integration etc.
doesn't necessarily prevent dishonest feedback left for buyers or sellers unless SR admins manually edit feedback data (?)
benefits for sellers:-
can rest assured any sale under $21 (less postage/shipping) could be paid for by the guest deposit of £20.
{decision could be made to write off / exclude p&p as a $20/20 euro sale is pretty low.}
can get to know buyers from 0 feedback till status changes to "normal" and beyond.
i hope the above ideas address concerns of buyers and sellers.
-
:) :) :) :) :) :) :) ;D You got my vote 8)
"guest status" user --x months--> normal user status .. ..
from 0-x purchase feedback expected 10>= feedback (?)
intro a/c cost +- $20
purchase <= $20/20 euro (=cost) possibile intro of deposit a/c value $60 (?)
guest a/c's:
new a/c's require the $20/20 euro and purchases kept below $21 to hep prevent scamming opportunities, although sellers
can opt out of the "rule" at their own risk. {feedback may need to reflect this if occurs..}
facilitates new joiners w/o shifting loss to any sellers or existing users/buyers.
problem users can be terminated at any time and deposit is non-refundable (?)
guest users can continue to use their own usernames (no generic guest user needed)
benefits are minimal changes to the simple machines forum / profile.
normal user a/c's:
$60 helps prevent user exiting guest status and pull off a scam of large order the moment status changes to "normal"
decision to be taken what to do with existing buyer a/c's.
status change from guest --> normal is just a change on user profile or automated (?)
what above doesn't address or prevent;-
whether to restructure feedback as it currently stands {seems advisable}
existing LE's "in the system" / already registered. {hoped additional security perhaps addresses this..?!}
doesn't prevent a rogue seller from pulling a scam themselves esp on new joiners, although the a/c fee should deter this.
additional security still needs investigation and implemented. ie dongles, user & pgp integration etc.
doesn't necessarily prevent dishonest feedback left for buyers or sellers unless SR admins manually edit feedback data (?)
benefits for sellers:-
can rest assured any sale under $21 (less postage/shipping) could be paid for by the guest deposit of £20.
{decision could be made to write off / exclude p&p as a $20/20 euro sale is pretty low.}
can get to know buyers from 0 feedback till status changes to "normal" and beyond.
i hope the above ideas address concerns of buyers and sellers.
-
...ik denk aan jullie ook... ;)
tried to come up with the best solution / compromise...
;D ;D
-
honestly, i think something needs to be done, the popularity of the silk road makes it a HUGE target for pieces of shit from all around the world.
i know its only a small percentage that are scammer trolls, but its become a huge worry and pain in the ass for sellers on the silk road.
these are just mere suggestions on how to combat the bad apples.
Looks like we all agree, something more needs to be done.
Every scumbag that thinks he can get a scam going will be coming here.
Sellers and buyers need to stick together circle the wagons, and protect each other.
+1!
-
...but a lot of sellers are choosing stealth mode and deal with their select customers so this can't be as big an issue anymore -they now choose who to deal with and
what reason is there to deal with a scammer ?! i don't fully understand how a seller is going to "invite" or allow newer buyers to see whats on the menu ..what this
mechanism is or how it works, far as i'm concerned i would only see a limited no of products and at which point do i know theres more or less....?!
???
-
I wouldn't mind paying for an account, but I'm still opposed to buyer's feedback for the same reason I always am: it would immediately stop all negative feedback from buyers, as they know--just like ebay--that vendors would then give bad feedback to them. No way around that one, and every once in a while on ebay you see an exception, but it's about 1 out of 20 or so: vendors wait until you leave positive feedback to post theirs.
The system as it is works, for me. All the good vendors seem to rise up to the top, and certainly the few negative feedback scores don't affect that much. I'd be ok however with a dispute forum, or a reply to negative feedback allowed by vendors, which may seem like the same thing, but to me it's different: vendors should be able to dispute negative feedback, perhaps there would be some way to accomplish this, but I don't want vendors having a way to retaliate for negative feedback.
BTW, I don't think I've ever posted anything but 5/5 positive feedback, accept on ItalianPilot who had ripped me off for several hundred dollars. Any other problems I"ve had along the way, I just work it out with vendors and leave them good feedback, as I should.
-
I think it's a great idea as well, especially for the new buyer that sellers are weary of selling to. Something like this definitely needs to be implemented in some way or another.
-
- a security device / dongle to securely identify both the buyer & vendor -anonymously not associated with real name but SR profile.
- still gpg / pgp or better encryption for messaging.
- deposit for a buyer account and equivalent purchase necessary for a vendor account.
- a trackable / dcn / delivery service -"proves" despatch & delivery; the delivery service & method is not known by neither buyer nor vendor.
- mediator(s) to help resolve disputes.
- product batch testing and details published
(would help but is also up for some abuse if you know how...}
- nothing is fool proof and there's always someone who'll find a way to abuse the system but at least the above & some transparency would work for both sides, but
what would this add to operating costs ?!
;)
-
I wouldn't mind paying for an account, but I'm still opposed to buyer's feedback for the same reason I always am: it would immediately stop all negative feedback from buyers, as they know--just like ebay--that vendors would then give bad feedback to them. No way around that one, and every once in a while on ebay you see an exception, but it's about 1 out of 20 or so: vendors wait until you leave positive feedback to post theirs.
The system as it is works, for me. All the good vendors seem to rise up to the top, and certainly the few negative feedback scores don't affect that much. I'd be ok however with a dispute forum, or a reply to negative feedback allowed by vendors, which may seem like the same thing, but to me it's different: vendors should be able to dispute negative feedback, perhaps there would be some way to accomplish this, but I don't want vendors having a way to retaliate for negative feedback.
.....
- good points
- its real difficult real learning curve as a new buyer i've been there we've all been there.
- service is service whether is tescos / walmart / city bank / lloyds tsb or SR, same principals similar experience and expectations on both sides.
- after a couple orders i'm accustomed to the process and more at ease.
- there's a great big black hole an unknown between a sent parcel and receiving it.
- even trust is flaky as we see so called established vendors going awol and buyers scamming after months.
- i've come to realise preparation is hard work and time consuming just by seeing the final order, putting yourself in the vendors shoes & their feedback.
- there is still some anxiety of dealing with new vendors and dodging the authorities.
:o ;)
-
I'm all for both ideas, I think. But buyer accounts will probably never cost money, no matter how great an idea it is. It really would scare off a large proportion of potential buyers, because it sounds like a scam. "Hey, we've got ALL THESE DRUGS up for sale! You just have to pay us 20/50/whatever dollars, and then we set you loose on it. ;D" LOL, yeah, sure.
It seems to me like putting a cap on site growth will put a cap on the income SR makes from fees. So I'm pretty skeptical about whether we'll see any changes that really stifle buyers from joining.
-
Well, if SR started charging for buyer's accounts, now that he's fairly well known, it would help buyers too, because it would eliminate what the scammers do, which is sign up a bunch of fake accounts to give good feedback on their bogus crap. Or, betters, as some have suggested, put the money in escrow for a few months...I've never liked the fact that someone can sign up for as many accounts as they need.
And then just have a sort of dispute resolution area, where if a buyer leaves bad feedback, a vendor could explain his side of the story in the same area. But again, the good vendors rise above all of it, and get the good rep anyway, it appears to me. Most of the people on this site seem decent, and the few bad ones screw it all up, but I think it's important we continue to see it as all of us in this together, and continue to push for improvements that wouldn't cause harm. It's unfortunate what happens with feedback, but it's so easily abused of...
-
I couldn't agree more
-
Totally agree as well. I really hope both changes can and do happen at some point.
-
I like the idea of paying for a buyers account, but I do think it needs to be done carefully. Without paying for an account you should be able to sign up and browse SR. But no purchasing and no PMs. This is important because new people (I think) always find SR before finding these forums. Before I made my first purchase I read through these forums extensively, which helped me realize it wasn't all a scam. If people can at least browse SR first they can then find the link to these forums and read up. If there is a requirement to pay just to view the site, with no access to the forums, I don't think anyone at all would ever pay.
I also very much like the idea above that the money goes into an escrow account for a few months. Or it could even be something like a 10BTC fee for signing up and then for each of your first ten purchases 1 of those BTC goes towards the purchase price. By the time you make ten orders all of your BTC have been refunded and by that time you would be considered an established buyer.
Thoughts?
-
Here's my little rant as a buyer:
Personally, I wouldn't mind paying for a buyer's account, but I'm not sure that's the right solution.
There isn't a top rated vendor here with whom I would refuse to do business simply because of negative newbie feedback. I don't care if your rating is 100%, as long as it's in the 90s, because I take the time to research each vendor I'm considering ordering from. Newbie scams are easy to spot when I'm checking you out. If you're in the top percentile of vendors, and have hundreds of positive transactions, I'm not going to place much stock in the newbie who leaves you a 1/5 and runs straight to the forums to cry about you screwing him out of his stamp bag.
I realize that many of you put a lot of time and effort into achieving and maintaining a high seller rating and that it is important to you... So I can appreciate your frustration when a new buyer tries to leverage you with the feedback system.
The bottom line is this: Any vendor who intends to become successful on the Road isn't interested in pulling selective scams, and any buyer who cares about building solid stats so that vendors are eager to have their business will think twice before escalating a dispute to the point of no return.
Repeat business with respected clients and referrals are a cornerstone of any successful business- but you can't please all customers, and there are certainly those whose business you simply do not want. I'm not a believer in the concept of the customer always being right, or that all business is good business. Perhaps vendors should require ALL NEW BUYERS to message them prior to placing an order. Or only accept a limited number of new customers each week.
I have a vendor for spikes, V86. I'm not interested in ordering anything he sells from anyone but him, because he flat-out hooks me up, and he does so for no other reason of which I'm aware than because he recognizes me as a repeat customer. He says thank you. I communicate, am flexible. I finalize early because I don't think there's any reason to make him wait for his money. Sometimes he sends me free stuff, but I don't expect him to. If there was a problem with an order, I wouldn't threaten and try to beat him up with feedback.
He cultivated a relationship.
It's your business- Run it your way.
I'm not looking for a (100) after your name- I'm reading what people are saying about you, and how you react when you read it.
All interaction here should be strictly voluntary, including amicable dispute resolution. I care about my buyer stats, therefore it is more advantageous to me, as a buyer, in maintaining those stats by trying to resolve things like a professional human being instead of like an asshole. I expect that assholes will invariably try to scam you, as a vendor, and that your feedback will suffer.
And buyers, have some damned respect for your vendors. The good ones here work hard. Find them. Message them. Have some patience with them, and be somewhat flexible. You'll get better results than trying to get something for nothing.
/end rant
-
as I recently had happen to me, a buyer can claim he didn't receive shipment (even when Delivery Confirmation shows they received it). What recourse does that leave a seller? He can fight it in resolution, but the buyer will almost surely leave negative feedback, while the seller has no such ability (although he may get to keep his bitcoins). In my case, I simply cancelled the order and gave up the Bitcoins rather than risk the negative feedback, especially with the unfriendly new seller rating system.
I haven't read this whole thread, so I don't know if this has ever been proposed. I thought of it just this second, so it might not be very well articulated. It is by no means a perfect plan, nor well thought out for that matter. But I think it could have potential. Or maybe it's just too complicated to implement. In any case...
I think an effective way to prevent a buyer from giving a vendor undeserved negative feedback, in cases like the one mentioned above, is to have an automatic feature that disables the buyer's ability to leave feedback for that specific transaction if a dispute has been filed and carried through. Another aspect that could go along with this feature would be the automatic deletion of a buyer's negative feedback for a specific transaction, if the dispute has been settled in his favor. Or limiting just how negative the feedback being left can be after a dispute has been settled. For example, making the lowest number the buyer could rate a 3 out of 5, while also disabling his ability to leave a comment. Thus, the vendor would only be left with a number rating with no commentary. Having a 3/5 with no psychobabble is better than getting a 1/5 with psychobabble in tact. This is my idea of a compromise while still respecting both buyers' and the vendors' rights.
That's the short and skinny of my proposal. There are more details to add, consider, and debate. Such as, whether or not a vendor could file a dispute with a buyer in order to prevent the buyer from being able to leave feedback.
If anyone thinks it's a worthy idea, feel free to steal it, expand on it, and post it up in the feature request thread.
I don't agree that buyers should have to pay for accounts though. That's just absurd. I'm an honest buyer and I have a good rapport with the vendors I purchase from. Prices on SR are high enough as is. If I had to pay for my account, as much as I love my vendors and the quality of their products, it would not be worth it to me to buy on SR. More detailed buyer stats, I'm all for. I'm fairly new. I've been around for a month and I still have under 10 transactions, which leaves me vulnerable to FE. I know that if I had feedback from the vendors I've made purchases with thus far, it would all be positive. And that would hopefully make it so that other vendors, who I have yet to do business with, wouldn't feel compelled to make me FE, nor be weary to do business with me in the first place.
-
I don't think it would be a good idea to ask money for a buyer's account.
The possibility for vendors to give feedback on customers like on ebay should be enough.
-
- bear in mind $40 times the No of reg'd users is shit load of money which could earn a lot of interest or be put to better use instead of sitting around in an account.
maybe DPR could put it towards running a "lab" or an investment pool..
- would expect the $40 to go towards guaranteeing payment when buyers go awol and don't know what amount would and which fund when a rouge vendor
makes off with thousands....so
:o
-
Letting buyers pay for accounts sounds allright to me, but it has to be 1$ maximum and it has to go in the give a penny take a penny fund. That way I will not have so many people message me to make a custom order for them since they are 20ct away from ordering what they want. With feedback I always take the hit of a 1/5 rating if a customer is being unreasonable, it sucks but Ive earned enough rep that a occasional 1/5 wont make me any less trusted in the community.
tl;dr 1$ buyer accounts and no change on the feedback system.
-
As a relatively new buyer on SR, I just want to pipe up and say my piece: I definitely support buyer feedback. I only deal with highly trusted, reputable vendors and it would be awesome to get back some of the praise that I send out myself. I'd like to build a relationship with them but it's awfully one-sided when they can't comment publicly on my behavior. I always finalize the moment I verify contents and it would be nice to be recognized for that.
For the system to work, everybody needs to have a say, even a small one. That way the community can let people in while still maintaining a "circle the wagons" sort of atmosphere. Just my 2btc
-
Letting buyers pay for accounts sounds allright to me, but it has to be 1$ maximum and it has to go in the give a penny take a penny fund. That way I will not have so many people message me to make a custom order for them since they are 20ct away from ordering what they want. With feedback I always take the hit of a 1/5 rating if a customer is being unreasonable, it sucks but Ive earned enough rep that a occasional 1/5 wont make me any less trusted in the community.
tl;dr 1$ buyer accounts and no change on the feedback system.
haha
- also think the suggestion was the "deposit" would cover a scammer trying to rip someone off so you spend no more than the deposit, just a suggestion.
I'd like to build a relationship with them but it's awfully one-sided when they can't comment publicly on my behavior. I always finalize the moment I verify contents and it would be nice to be recognized for that.
- again look at the way ebay do it, doesn't have to be compicated, unfortunately that requires coding...
- just a quick post this subject has already been thrashed out in 10 other threads its not like its the first time its been mentioned.
:D
-
I don't think that anyone would try to sabotage a seller if they got what they paid for and there were no problems? WHy would you do that to someone that hooked you up, basically doing you a favor.
Plus, nobody would leave feedback if there was a chance that the seller could retaliate, would they? They wouldn't take the risk of screwing themselves over for every future purchase that they were trying to make.
Buyer feedback would be manipulated just as easily as seller feedback, so it really wouldn't work.
-
- this isn't a guide on how to scam.
- the idea was the deposit would deter scammers signing up ...and then later scamming...why ...cos have to lay out $40 to open an account, then there's some left
in a pot when placing a sub $40 order.
:o