Silk Road forums
Discussion => Silk Road discussion => Topic started by: Dread Pirate Roberts on September 12, 2013, 02:12 am
-
Let's see, where were we... oh yea, ratings and review overhaul :P
From what I'm getting, it sounds like there are a couple of issues some are still having with the changes:
1) "Preventing buyers from editing reviews forces them to wait until their transaction is resolved and we won't know fast enough if a vendor is scamming." Don't forget about the discussion boards! If these turn out to be insufficient, we'll definitely look at making changes, but as of now I don't want to change anything based on hypothetical problems.
2) "Labeling 4 of 5 as "solid, would recommend" is bringing down my average." Don't worry, it's a level playing field and all vendors are experiencing this. The net effect is to give more info to buyers, distinguishing "solid" vendors from "outstanding" ones.
There are a couple of more tweaks that will likely get pushed out in the coming days/weeks, and we can continue to talk about them in this thread:
http://dkn255hz262ypmii.onion/index.php?topic=208095.0
but I think we are ready to open up discussion about the next phase of the overhaul, which is empowering vendors to judge their potential customers. The obvious feature that's been tossed around is allowing vendors to rate/review their customers after a transaction is complete so other vendors can have a better idea of whether they want to accept them as their customers.
I think we need this feature. Vendors are already keeping and sharing "buyer black lists", but in an inefficient and non transparent way. We should either discourage this, or integrate it into the system and I personally think it should be integrated. However, I want everyone's input before we go making more major changes. If you think it's a terribly idea or a great one, now is your chance to convince the community.
PS - I'm committed that these changes go much more smoothly than the previous ones. For my part, I will try to change as little as possible at a time and do my best to receive everyone's feedback. I request that you have patience and keep the discourse as civil and constructive as you can. Thanks!
-
To address number 2, it's not a level playing field when older vendors have months or years of all 5/5 ratings and newer vendors are getting a 4/5 for perfect service. As we all know, an older vendor with thousands of 5/5 from before this new system can receive many 1/5s without even losing their perfect 5.0/5
That is not level at all.
I am all for buyer feedback. A system much like vendor feedback where vendors can comment on transactions using an alias and give a rating.
-
Will it be possible for the buyer to read what vendors have written about him/her?
(edit: fixed typo)
-
This comment is not meant to be discouraging, but rather to be a caution of the most glaring potential complication:
Given the difference in volume of transactions of one vendor vs. that of one buyer, a bad review would be of a lot higher consequence to the buyer. The reason for buyer feedback, empowering vendors, can very easily turn into a power trip for vendors. There is currently a lot higher a threshold of scam accusations afforded to vendors than there is to buyers, and for good reason- they pay a bond, they cut their teeth in a tough opening game, and deal with a lot more people, instead of whipping together an account willy-nilly like a buyer can. I think that this already protects them in a way that is not a slippery slope away from blackmail and extortion.
The "buyer black lists", though opaque, are at least available as suggestions to be discussed between vendors. Buyer reviews would serve as permanent marks that are not up for discussions of evidence.
So, if this was done, there would need to be some very good assurance that false accusations and hasty incriminations would have as little consequence as they do when they are placed against vendors.
-
The "buyer black lists", though opaque, are at least available as suggestions to be discussed between vendors. Buyer reviews would serve as permanent marks that are not up for discussions of evidence.
So, if this was done, there would need to be some very good assurance that false accusations and hasty incriminations would have as little consequence as they do when they are placed against vendors.
We don't discuss anything about buyers on the blacklist. They get put on and stay there. It is a long list.
-
Hah, I would imagine it is. Do you suppose it would hold any less weight than buyer reviews, though? Does my point about higher potential for exploitation stand?
-
The "buyer black lists", though opaque, are at least available as suggestions to be discussed between vendors. Buyer reviews would serve as permanent marks that are not up for discussions of evidence.
So, if this was done, there would need to be some very good assurance that false accusations and hasty incriminations would have as little consequence as they do when they are placed against vendors.
We don't discuss anything about buyers on the blacklist. They get put on and stay there. It is a long list.
And what keeps them from just making a new account? Maybe with a few small transactions.
Or is this blacklist a list of addresses? That would be an insane security problem.
-
Hi DPR,
I think inbuilt buyer feedback is a good idea, I have a lot of good relationships I've built up with vendors and it would be good if those could assist me when I start doing business with new vendors by showing them I am a serious buyer and won't fuck them around.
At the same time I've had some vendors who have attempted to scam me before and it makes me nervous that they could then attempt to make it harder for me to do business in future, although I guess they already can through the vendor blacklist.
I have a few ideas:
1. Make feedback permanent like it is when we rate vendors.
2. Give us the ability to challenge unfair feedback that vendors leave us, or at least respond to it so that vendors can see our side of the story.
3. Don't show our entire purchasing history as that could compromise our security if a vendor reported us to LE.
4. Prioritize the large transactions we have done as these provide the most important information to vendors about our buying history. This would also prevent vendors making listings like 'Good feedback for $10'.
5. Don't allow vendors to leave buyers feedback after they have been through a resolution process with us.
6. Prioritize feedback from larger vendors who have been here a longer time.
-
To address number 2, it's not a level playing field when older vendors have months or years of all 5/5 ratings and newer vendors are getting a 4/5 for perfect service. As we all know, an older vendor with thousands of 5/5 from before this new system can receive many 1/5s without even losing their perfect 5.0/5
That is not level at all.
Since that old feedback weight is aged out of the calculation, it won't count to any meaningful degree. Current feedback carries more relevance and therefore more weight.
I am all for buyer feedback. A system much like vendor feedback where vendors can comment on transactions using an alias and give a rating.
This would probably temper buyers from leaving 4/5 reviews. Most will leave 5/5 reviews in hopes of receiving the same.
Buyer rating would also encourage buyers to finalize earlier. Anyone who lets a domestic order auto-finalize will invariably receive a 1/5 as well they should.
To the poster above who worried about vendors using it to blackmail buyers; that's possible, per se. What is more likely to happen is if a buyer leaves a 4/5 and a vendor is able to discern this, the vendor would likely leave a 4/5 or less in return. Knowing this, the majority of buyers will revert back to leaving 5/5 by default.
On the other hand, if buyer attempts some sort of feedback blackmail, they can expect retaliation in kind. The buyers with the best diplomatic skills and realistic expectations shouldn't have any issue at all with being rated.
Consider also that most vendors won't have time to rate each buyer. Only the ones that attempted to scam, were difficult to deal with, irrational, or who let an order auto-finalize. Suspect buyers will continue to be discussed among vendors privately.
-
Hi DPR,
I think inbuilt buyer feedback is a good idea, I have a lot of good relationships I've built up with vendors and it would be good if those could assist me when I start doing business with new vendors by showing them I am a serious buyer and won't fuck them around.
At the same time I've had some vendors who have attempted to scam me before and it makes me nervous that they could then attempt to make it harder for me to do business in future, although I guess they already can through the vendor blacklist.
I have a few ideas:
1. Make feedback permanent like it is when we rate vendors.
2. Give us the ability to challenge unfair feedback that vendors leave us, or at least respond to it so that vendors can see our side of the story.
3. Don't show our entire purchasing history as that could compromise our security if a vendor reported us to LE.
4. Prioritize the large transactions we have done as these provide the most important information to vendors about our buying history. This would also prevent vendors making listings like 'Good feedback for $10'.
5. Don't allow vendors to leave buyers feedback after they have been through a resolution process with us.
6. Prioritize feedback from larger vendors who have been here a longer time.
All that you listed should also be afforded vendors, especially #5. If a buyer loses in resolutions, they should not be allowed to leave feedback.
-
Good feedback for 10$. Wow that is bullshit, now I'm kind of against the system. But I guess you could just rule out offers like that, like selling weapons. That does not stop vendors from offering it though a message or trying to blackmail/ransom you with it. Like if you take 1g less then you'll get a good review or some bullshit like that. Not saying vendors with a good reputation would do this.
-
To address number 2, it's not a level playing field when older vendors have months or years of all 5/5 ratings and newer vendors are getting a 4/5 for perfect service. As we all know, an older vendor with thousands of 5/5 from before this new system can receive many 1/5s without even losing their perfect 5.0/5
That is not level at all.
Since that old feedback weight is aged out of the calculation, it won't count to any meaningful degree. Current feedback carries more relevance and therefore more weight.
I have personally seen older vendors receive MULTIPLE 1/5 on multi thousand dollar transactions since the new update and they remained at 5.0/5
Old feedback ratings still hold nice weight.
-
I guess buyer ratings would be OK. I'm not so sure about buyer reviews. With the vendor reviews there is a lot to write about like stealth, shipping speed, communication (if applicable), product quality and whatever else I'm not thinking of. What would vendors say in buyers reviews though? Maybe if the buyer paid, paid on time, was a real pain in the butt/a real nice guy.
How about instead of a comment box there can just be a couple of yes/no answers to pick from. Did the buyer pay on time? Would you do business with this buyer again? And any more you can think of.
And speaking of level playing fields, I hope it'll be setup so that us buyers who have worked hard to establish their stats and accounts don't look like newbies just because they have as many buyer reviews as someone just starting out.
-
I am a buyer, and would not be against buyers being rated. Seems to be fair.
A point about #2 : The vast majority of vendor pages that I have seen at some point state that anything less than 5/5 = BLACKLIST
I really don't see how that should be allowed. We have a rating system for a reason right? Giving someone a "solid" gets you blacklisted?
A 4/5 means that I may actually want to deal with a vendor in the future, so being blacklisted for that is crazy. If I had rated a vendor any less than 4/5, I likely wouldn't want to use them again anyway, but being threatened for good feedback is just bad stuff.
-
Having a rating system for buyers would really seem to encourage the buyer to leave positive feedback in order to receive a good rating in return.
How about allowing vendors to "trust" buyers, like on LocalBitcoins? In your purchasing stats, you would have a cumulative total of active vendors whom trust you, maybe even list those vendors names.
-
Yea buyer rating does leave the buyer open to retaliation and blackmail which is why eBay and other auction sites don't allow sellers to leave negative feedback. But as it stands right now there is an unofficial black list floating around. A buyer may not even know he/she is on it or reply.
On a site of this nature buyer feedback could help other vendors feel more comfortable with a newer member who will then take chances with new costumes.
The only other thought I have is allowing buyer/vendor to reply to negative feedback so both sides are out there for people to judge. Over all I think it could solve more problems than it creates.
No matter what you do people will figure out a way to game the system. It's better to get people as much info as possible to make the best choice they can.
Good luck with the work you are doing.
-
Hey DPR
Just wanted to voice my concern and opinion.
Regarding the new system, I love it and agree with it and everything you mentioned. However my only concern is that we can no longer see which customer left what feedback. With this it is hard to leave a feedback for a vendor. For example a buyer leaves negative feedback without contacting you.
Now I want to leave feedback for this buyer saying "left negative feedback without contact to make it right". However I do not know which buyer left this feedback, so how do I rate the buyer if I do not know which feedback belongs to which buyer?
I think THIS needs to be address. Other then that I love the new discussion board and I think with time ratings will level out and the solid vendors can be distinguished from the mediocre ones. Before transactions were lost and hidden and it was hard to gauge a buyer. These improvements have been awesome, keep in mind you are dealing with a bunch of addicts and drug dealers, among them scammers and sleazebags and anything that is going to make scamming more difficult is likely to receive a negative response. (Not saying everyone who hates the new system is a scammer, however don't be surprised if a large majority are - because scamming buyers and vendors would hate this new system)
-
I honestly can't tell if I'm for buyer ratings. A few questions come up when I think about it. Firstly, will noobish behavior from well meaning newcomers, such as PGPing incorrectly, or pestering the vendor if the package hasn't arrived yet, be grounds for taking points off a buyer's rating? Also, please bear in mind that a rating on a buyer will have a much larger effect than a rating on a vendor. Example, a vendor has thousands of transactions, so one is a drop in the bucket. I have less than ten buys, so if I accidentally screw one up, or worse yet if a noob screws up his first and happens to piss off a vendor having a bad day, could he be looking at something similar to being blacklisted?
-
Yea buyer rating does leave the buyer open to retaliation and blackmail.
Just like vendors are left open to retaliation and blackmail right? ::)
-
If it shows that a particular buyer has negative responses from more than 1 vendor, & they can respond to what the problem was it will definitely start to show a pattern, or show that 2 vendors had itchy fingers! Either way, vendors should give explanations
NCK
-
Geez...as Vendors....why do we get the short end of the stick?
We put our asses on the line...we keep the buyers Safe...well..some of us do...we build a customer base through trust...why do i hear all of this bitching from buyers? Listen people...buy your shit and push on...if you're going to be anal about this..then push the fuck on to somewhere else.....for every one of you that leaves..there are 7 of you buyers that will come here...you should all feel blessed that we don't ....as vendors...talk shit on ya'll like ya'll do us...come on now...this isn't ebay and this isn't wal-mart....look around the forums...it's when buyers start shit that the prices go up and feelings get hurt....1.5 years ago things were different...things were good...then the buyers started to get cocky and shit broke loose....now ya'll seem to be even more unhappy....give it a break...
Fuck it...i am done talking..
Peace,
Chem
O0
-
Yea buyer rating does leave the buyer open to retaliation and blackmail.
Just like vendors are left open to retaliation and blackmail right? ::)
I agree with you and I said that. I am in favor of feedback for buyers.
-
If it shows that a particular buyer has negative responses from more than 1 vendor, & they can respond to what the problem was it will definitely start to show a pattern, or show that 2 vendors had itchy fingers! Either way, vendors should give explanations
NCK
Heya NCK :)
**Clears Throat**
Most Reputable Vendors will & Do give Explanations & they seem to get fucked by goofy buyers...as far as i've experienced, this is just my opinion..there should be some type of similance towards buyers and sellers..a common ground...as vendors we take ..or some of us do...pride in the fact that we make sure their personal info is safe...in transit means that the buyers personal info is deleted...yet we get flack for dumb shit like the buyer didnt like the taste of the weed or the rush wasnt good enough from the molly...come on now...buy shit from the streets and ya really don't know what ya get...Buyers...do your research..find good vendors and stick with them...look at how many of you get scammed because you don't use good judgement.. (Rolls Eyes)
Listen....we have AWESOME Vendors here...then we have buyers that send us addys to churches..police stations...etcetera...etcetera...etcetera.... just my opinion..but to much change is not always a good thing...Folks, we have a working market that really does not need to be changed...do your deeds and be Happy :)
-
To address number 2, it's not a level playing field when older vendors have months or years of all 5/5 ratings and newer vendors are getting a 4/5 for perfect service. As we all know, an older vendor with thousands of 5/5 from before this new system can receive many 1/5s without even losing their perfect 5.0/5
That is not level at all.
Since that old feedback weight is aged out of the calculation, it won't count to any meaningful degree. Current feedback carries more relevance and therefore more weight.
I have personally seen older vendors receive 1/5 on multi thousand dollar transactions since the new update and they remained at 5.0/5
Old feedback ratings still hold nice weight.
It will be hard pressed to get ANY vendor who has been here over a year (or even less) to want to volunteer to give their thousands upon thousands of 5/5's that they worked their collective asses off to get through great service & customer service to voluntarily give all those 5/5's up & accept 4/5 to mean the same!
It ultimately lowers the quality of the playing field, which ultimately means that if the transaction was a slight hint of not totally 100% positive (like they didn't receive the order when they wanted) as a vendor we now are susceptible to a 3/5 . . . so right off the bat we give up 20-40% for doing exactly what we were doing before they screwed the pooch!
Sorry, I really didn't believe that SR really needed to stoop to the complacency of the other wanna be sites . . . It makes the good & awesome vendors look average which is a hell of a thank you for helping build SR into what is is today (so far)
NCK
NCK
-
I would like vendors to have the ability to mark and leave a comment about scammer or problem buyers.
I don't want to have to leave or read feedback for each buyer though, just the ones that have given another vendor enough of a headache to comment on.
The only thing it should do in addition to what the buyer blacklist does now is automatically notify me of any customers who are on it. It would be important to know which vendor left the negative comment so I can weigh reputations.
-
So lets do away with the "Rating System" Why don't we just go with Forum Presence and the fact that Some Vendors actually Speak with their Customers outside of the SR msg system or the SR Resolution system. Maybe this isn't my place to say this...but i feel left out of the Vendors Forum...
In my Short time as being a Vendor, i really think that being here in the forums and having personal contact with my customers, we've (My customers & Myself) have built crazy good trustworthy relationships....since we're doing changes like ebay was 3 years ago...lets do away with the ratings...lets just go on a personal basis...i understand that there are alot of Great Vendors that don't have the time for that personal touch....just my opinion..mind you....ehhh...i gotta pee..be right back ???
-
I would like to see "Buyer feedback" so that vendors can give feedback comments on buyers so buyers will be on better behavior, as vendors we often get bullied by buyers or have a lot of bad attitude, it would be nice to see feedback from other vendors before we decide to do business with that buyer, vendors comments should be anonymous as to not aid LE.
Also it would be good to have a buyers rating, after the transaction is complete the vendor can rate the buyer 1/5 or 5/5 etc stats are important for buyers too we need to be more equal, we get scammed, we make re-ships no one protects us, if we have some power over the buyer too then this would help significantly to encourage the buyers to get good stats and behave respectfully.
-
To address number 2, it's not a level playing field when older vendors have months or years of all 5/5 ratings and newer vendors are getting a 4/5 for perfect service. As we all know, an older vendor with thousands of 5/5 from before this new system can receive many 1/5s without even losing their perfect 5.0/5
That is not level at all.
Since that old feedback weight is aged out of the calculation, it won't count to any meaningful degree. Current feedback carries more relevance and therefore more weight.
I have personally seen older vendors receive 1/5 on multi thousand dollar transactions since the new update and they remained at 5.0/5
Old feedback ratings still hold nice weight.
It will be hard pressed to get ANY vendor who has been here over a year (or even less) to want to volunteer to give their thousands upon thousands of 5/5's that they worked their collective asses off to get through great service & customer service to voluntarily give all those 5/5's up & accept 4/5 to mean the same!
It ultimately lowers the quality of the playing field, which ultimately means that if the transaction was a slight hint of not totally 100% positive (like they didn't receive the order when they wanted) as a vendor we now are susceptible to a 3/5 . . . so right off the bat we give up 20-40% for doing exactly what we were doing before they screwed the pooch!
Sorry, I really didn't believe that SR really needed to stoop to the complacency of the other wanna be sites . . . It makes the good & awesome vendors look average which is a hell of a thank you for helping build SR into what is is today (so far)
NCK
NCK
I feel ya NCK. I was pretty upset at first when I saw the change. DPR has made it harder for us to maintain a 5.0. It adds stress for us but may make things more competitive which betters the market at a whole.
IMO a less complicated positive/neutral/negative rating system would be better. The difference between a 4/5 and a 5/5 just isn't that clear.
One tweak that I believe would improve SR is to more clearly show buyers which vendors require FE and which ones don't. Maybe allow them to view non-FE vendors as they can domestic only vendors. Possibly change the color of the vendor name or give them a special tag if they never require FE. I believe this single change would make FE almost non-existent via competition.
-
I would love to have the option to leave feedback for buyers.
The fact is that 99% of my customers are pretty great to deal with and this is worth commenting on as much as the other 1%.
Another option that would be great would be the ability for buyers and sellers to respond to an individual feedback to show two sides to any story.
Just once so that the 1% of crazy people/scammers don't have the chance to turn it into a flame war.
-
Hey DPR
Just wanted to voice my concern and opinion.
Regarding the new system, I love it and agree with it and everything you mentioned. However my only concern is that we can no longer see which customer left what feedback. With this it is hard to leave a feedback for a vendor. For example a buyer leaves negative feedback without contacting you.
Now I want to leave feedback for this buyer saying "left negative feedback without contact to make it right". However I do not know which buyer left this feedback, so how do I rate the buyer if I do not know which feedback belongs to which buyer?
I think THIS needs to be address. Other then that I love the new discussion board and I think with time ratings will level out and the solid vendors can be distinguished from the mediocre ones. Before transactions were lost and hidden and it was hard to gauge a buyer. These improvements have been awesome, keep in mind you are dealing with a bunch of addicts and drug dealers, among them scammers and sleazebags and anything that is going to make scamming more difficult is likely to receive a negative response. (Not saying everyone who hates the new system is a scammer, however don't be surprised if a large majority are - because scamming buyers and vendors would hate this new system)
On your account page, "recent orders" on the right hand side. You can see all your recent buyer's usernames and rating given.
-
The existence of a blacklist clearly indicates this is something vendors want & would use. Since this would be a brand new ratings system, I'm curious to see how DPR sets it up. Should it be the exact same as the current vendor rating system? My only suggestion would be: if a vendor leaves a negative rating (like a 3 or lower, 2 or lower, or whatever), that the vendor is required to leave a review (or a detailed account of what happened). The same could be said for leaving vendor reviews, but it applies more so here because vendors are expected to have a certain intelligence / competence whereas buyers are random people.
-
I would love to have the option to leave feedback for buyers.
The fact is that 99% of my customers are pretty great to deal with and this is worth commenting on as much as the other 1%.
Another option that would be great would be the ability for buyers and sellers to respond to an individual feedback to show two sides to any story.
Just once so that the 1% of crazy people/scammers don't have the chance to turn it into a flame war.
No offense...but wouldn't that get us as vendors and buyers into heated debates? ugghhh..i gottta be up at dam 5 am to be on a roof ...however i wont go to sleep while this is going on,,,,ok...Forum Presence...this is crucial...i can sort of agree with the ratings...sort of...looking at all the posts..each one of you has a valid point...however...lets all look at the big picture...these ratings have caused some turbulance among us..as vendors and buyers...now what can we do as a team to get back on track? We're not out of options here...in my opinion..to many changes are being made in a rapid succession ...period....we're not here as buyers and vendors to classify eachother as assholes or good people we offer a service...as well as buyers offering a service to us as vendors by being quality trustworthy people that we can have to deal with..maybe i should back off a bit..as i am a new vendor and might not fully understand where you all want to or are going with this ??? I've done my time here on the forums and am comfortable in saying...the customers that i have..i love and will keep...in my mind i believe that through our interaction with our customers...here....we create a new...sustainable relationship which allows us..both customers and vendors to trust eachother....geez..i gotta pee again....be right back ???
-
Everything has two sides...
I would like to vote for a buyer rating, but...
I made the experience (on BMR):
Ordered some stuff (on BMR) which i saw before on SR.
It was not as strong as advertised and expected, but I gave a positive rating. In the review I wrote, that the stuff was not too strong, but it was probably due to my high tolerance. Maybe for persons which have not this high tolerance it works better.
Review from vendor: This is an annoying customer - just headache!
Rating was negative, of course (1 day before I gave a positive rating)!!
So, I think a vendor rating a buyer has much more effect than the other way.
But there was mentioned a good idea, rate the buyer by some points, as for example:
1. Did the buyer release the funds in time Y/N
2. If there was communication, polite Y/N
3. You can trust this buyer Y/N
or something like that.
What do you think?
-
Yea you can see the rating given but not the verbal feedback
-
Yea you can see the rating given but not the verbal feedback
But it should be enough for you identify the buyer. Even if it isn't, the reviews also show the product and exact quantity; so unless you have things go wrong with a bunch of people, it shouldn't be a problem identifying the buyer. Regardless, I guess DPR should try to come up with a way for vendors to communicate with whatever alias leaves a bad rating (so that vendors can make everything right). But I don't know how easy that would be. Vendors could send a message to an alias by adding a message option on each review. And maybe you could give buyers the option to send a message as an alias using radio buttons (and if vendors send a message to your alias, "reply as alias" would be selected by default). Idk, but I'm sure it'll get worked out.
-
So lets do away with the "Rating System" Why don't we just go with Forum Presence and the fact that Some Vendors actually Speak with their Customers outside of the SR msg system or the SR Resolution system. Maybe this isn't my place to say this...but i feel left out of the Vendors Forum...
In my Short time as being a Vendor, i really think that being here in the forums and having personal contact with my customers, we've (My customers & Myself) have built crazy good trustworthy relationships....since we're doing changes like ebay was 3 years ago...lets do away with the ratings...lets just go on a personal basis...i understand that there are alot of Great Vendors that don't have the time for that personal touch....just my opinion..mind you....ehhh...i gotta pee..be right back ???
That's a valid point but you are prolly the exception amongst most vendors. You have some vendors that have a hard time as it keeping up their orders and maintaining security of their operation. Just like how you pointed out that this is not Ebay or Wal-mart then in the same token you can't expect all vendors to engage with their customers outside of the actual transaction. I think it's great that you connect with your customers but again if that was the only system in place to determine the trust worthiness of a vendor it would be very easy to scam that system. Set up a vendor account, engage with my customers and act like I'm a great person for 5-6 months then pull a scam.
My personal view is buyers don't need feedback. I feel giving the vendors more detail about a potential customer would be more beneficial. Also one thing that bothers me is that vendors cannot see a buyers stats until after the order is placed. That is not at all beneficial for anyone. In most cases the customer gets pissed off at you because you can't fulfill their order. Had you know that their stats would not be up to par before hand you could of politely told them that they cannot order. The current way of doing things is the vendor will ask customers to message them and tell them a little bit about themselves and their account. Honestly that feels a lot more like a dating site when vendors have to resort to that. That's the first thing I'd fix before doing buyers feedback. Keep in mind vendors are busy people. They don't have time to sit and leave feedback for their customers. Some vendors fulfill 20+ orders a day. I can't believe a vendor with that many orders would bother with customer feedback. Otherwise the changes look good so far.
-
Having a rating system for buyers would really seem to encourage the buyer to leave positive feedback in order to receive a good rating in return.
How about allowing vendors to "trust" buyers, like on LocalBitcoins? In your purchasing stats, you would have a cumulative total of active vendors whom trust you, maybe even list those vendors names.
Yes, I like it. Although, I assume vendors wouldn't think this is enough. If this is the case, I think the below quote would be a wonderful compromise.
But there was mentioned a good idea, rate the buyer by some points, as for example:
1. Did the buyer release the funds in time Y/N
2. If there was communication, polite Y/N
3. You can trust this buyer Y/N
or something like that.
What do you think?
I'm in total agreement, although, I think #3 should be changed to "Would like to do business with buyer again"
-
I would love as a buyer to get reviews. Doesn't even have to be with ratings, things could get complicated.
I can imagine a simple "avoid" button with a text field for the vendors. If activated, there could be a system that prohibits this buyer automatically to make another order from the same vendor.
Similar thing could be made for the positive way as well.
But buyer should be always able to see what kind of feedback he gets.
-
As a vendor some thoughts:
1) As i have become more established and moved up the rankings, I have so much business I am not going to be blackmailing buyers etc etc. Who has the fucking time? I am making good money, i don't need any of that shit, i have a good rep cause i sell good shit, and 99% of customers are awesome. Buyers...seriously....any well rated vendor on here is too busy and making too much money to try and fuck with you. We don't need to.
2) The buyers blacklist, whilst helpful, is too hard to keep up with
3) 99% OF PROBLEM BUYERS I HAVE HAD, HAD LESS THAN 5 TRANSACTIONS. So unfortunately, now i just don't deal with them for anything more than $100. Think the reality is there is a very small sub set of immature fuckhead buyers who just keep creating new accounts, in order to try and scam a free transaction. Probably broke ass kids.
4) Point 3 sucks for genuine new buyers, but i figure they can buy a few small things off me first to develop a relationship, and it shouldn't be too hard on them, and if they are fuckheads, 1/5 reviews on small sales don't matter to me.
5) Given point 3, the only things i now really need to rate buyers on is:
a) did they finalise in a timely manner, and
b) were they rude / demanding / annoying and thus would i deal with them again.
Give us a yes / no answer to those two questions, and a percentage rating for them both when dealing with customers, and i'll be happy as a pig in shit
*** as an extra idea, one that i know will never fly......make buyers pay $20 to sign up. Will stop the endless new accounts from the same people. Paid back when they hit 6 weeks and $500 of buys.
**** as an aside...the only problem i have had with buyer who was not a newbie, was somebody who was very old, with excellent stats, who wanted a freeby. A few vendors have had problems like this i think, these heavy weights know their feedback carries alot of weight. Clicking no on the "would u deal with this buyer again" would suffice for this i think, no need to have to write anything etc etc. Not a common problem though
-
COOL Thread, thanks for making this thread.... this needed be brought to the spotlight
-
I am Not gonna say another word....except for this...can i get an exception please... :P
or maybe not? I wanna be with my buddies in the Vendors Forum ???
Pwease :P
Dagnabbit :)
-
I guess buyer ratings would be OK. I'm not so sure about buyer reviews. With the vendor reviews there is a lot to write about like stealth, shipping speed, communication (if applicable), product quality and whatever else I'm not thinking of. What would vendors say in buyers reviews though? Maybe if the buyer paid, paid on time, was a real pain in the butt/a real nice guy.
How about instead of a comment box there can just be a couple of yes/no answers to pick from. Did the buyer pay on time? Would you do business with this buyer again? And any more you can think of.
And speaking of level playing fields, I hope it'll be setup so that us buyers who have worked hard to establish their stats and accounts don't look like newbies just because they have as many buyer reviews as someone just starting out.
« Last Edit: Today at 03:34 am by SmokesHisBroccoli »
Having a rating system for buyers would really seem to encourage the buyer to leave positive feedback in order to receive a good rating in return.
How about allowing vendors to "trust" buyers, like on LocalBitcoins? In your purchasing stats, you would have a cumulative total of active vendors whom trust you, maybe even list those vendors names.
we're all for buyer ratings but as pointed out, some vendors could use it for extortion purposes etc so minimizing a review system down to a rating system and implementing a trust system (which would almost act like a 'fan' system for buyers), either public or private, combined with a weighted 'score' perhaps displayed in brackets after the username like ebay, always viewable by vendors on the site, would be great.
vendors being given the 5 important multiple choice questions about each transaction/buyer would keep it simple and obviously it would need to be optional. most vendors wouldn't have time to rate all the good transactions but the bad ones that take up so much of our time as it is, could be fairly judged by all. it takes 10x our time to deal with scammers/idiots and these fucks have nothing but time to fuck with us. they receive income by wasting our time and energy, its a job for these scum.
this way, in 10 seconds we can show the world how useless they are and how you don't want their business (and we can see the same, left by other vendors).
plus the upside is that we can REALLY start to develop trusted networks of buyers and concentrate all our time on making them happy.
this would be a great addition and benefit to the silk road.
viva DPR, viva SR, viva!
love, light and liberty to you all!!
(even the fucking scum scammers, one day hopefully you'll turn a new leaf....assholes :D )
-
Hey DPR,
would love to see a Buyers Site...
Vendors could leave Feedback, and the buyer should also have the possibility to answer.
It also would be nice if i could leave some Feedback for Users who lent some sparecoins..
That would proof the honest of the buyer, and show everyone he is a active part of the community!
Just my 2 cents..
Regards,
BBB
-
I think that the reviews should be double blind (buyer & vendor dont see each other's rating til after they both have rated) otherwise you will get less than honest reviews and ratings (which is what we are going for anyways) With out this you will just see 5/5's traded because the 1st rater is rating in fear of being screwed by the 2nd rater in the transaction seeing what they said and then rating accordingly. (potentially discouraging an honest review from either side)
-
Buyer ratings sound like a good idea if it's kept simple. I also like the idea of having an 'Avoid' button where the buyer is blacklisted for that vendor only.
In respect to the new feedback changes I'm finding it a little frustrating that some buyers are leaving ratings with no feedback. Not so bad if it's a 5/5 but anything less and I don't get feedback (I even have one rating that just says 'All good' where the buyer has left a 3/5 rating) it becomes a little frustrating as I cannot see exactly who left the rating to get feedback. I've recently had 4/5 with no feedback and while I'm happy that I'm recommended and 'solid' but I think it's a little unfair when a lot of vendors require 5/5 and keep records so that if you leave any less you will be marked as a bad egg (I know vendors do this and I'm sure they must have their own system to log).
Now being a small time vendor I'm finding declining sales while I seem to be seeing a lot more finalizing early with 5/5's (not sure if I'm seeing it because I'm looking for it though) which seems unfair as generally I don't require FE (unless new users - even then i don't always enforce this unless it's a larger order). I will generally work with customers to do my best but I'm seeing vendors with bad reps on their own message boards and 5/5 ratings that will remain at the top because they will always adapt their policies whenever DPR updates SR with new features to abuse new features.
Hope you can come up with a solution to keep everyone happy DPR.
-
Great post by AustralianHash too +1
-
Firstly : The current feedback system does not allow correction of honest mistakes by buyers. This should be allowed for a time-limited period. This is penalising vendors, as the only option is to remove the feedback completely. This needs to change.
Buyers feedback by vendors : needs to include a reship figure, as this is a common scam we are seeing more of. Plus I would add a general geographical location of buyer location as it is far too easy to set up a clean account and get products delivered to the same or very near address in a locality, and the cycle starts again.
t
-
Plus I would add a general geographical location of buyer location as it is far too easy to set up a clean account and get products delivered to the same or very near address in a locality, and the cycle starts again.
So LE can just sign up for a vendor account and go through SR recording all our addresses? No thanks. "Same or very near address" implies that you'd want this to be a specific address. Would we have to register that address once we sign up to SR?... would we now need to verify that address with ID, SSN, and a utility bill?
And if you made it a general location, that would be useless except for the scammers in the sticks... and even then, how do you know it's not just a different person? Are you gonna start blacklisting NYC, LA, Chicago, because some guy tried to scam you from there?
I do not like this idea one bit.
-
It will be hard pressed to get ANY vendor who has been here over a year (or even less) to want to volunteer to give their thousands upon thousands of 5/5's that they worked their collective asses off to get through great service & customer service to voluntarily give all those 5/5's up & accept 4/5 to mean the same!
It ultimately lowers the quality of the playing field, which ultimately means that if the transaction was a slight hint of not totally 100% positive (like they didn't receive the order when they wanted) as a vendor we now are susceptible to a 3/5 . . . so right off the bat we give up 20-40% for doing exactly what we were doing before they screwed the pooch!
Sorry, I really didn't believe that SR really needed to stoop to the complacency of the other wanna be sites . . . It makes the good & awesome vendors look average which is a hell of a thank you for helping build SR into what is is today (so far)
NCK
NCK
[/quote]
+
That is exactly what I am thinking.
Been here over 1.5 years.
All the great vendors ''made'' SR to what it is today (and future)
There was a system that worked fine, anyway most of it did, always room for improvement.
Without any warning everything is changed (and to see from the reactions 60% is not happy with that)
Clients don't even give feedback anymore....you can say they are stupid not understanding but...it is a system that only works when it is ''easy'' to understand and use.
Before 100% gave feedback, now ....last days 13 orders arrived, 3 feedback.
And I am lucky because I read many don't even get feedback anymore !!
The way to make this work as it should is using polls, referendum.
The people who WORK with it all day know best what is needed.
Thank you
-
Plus I would add a general geographical location of buyer location as it is far too easy to set up a clean account and get products delivered to the same or very near address in a locality, and the cycle starts again.
So LE can just sign up for a vendor account and go through SR recording all our addresses? No thanks. "Same or very near address" implies that you'd want this to be a specific address. Would we have to register that address once we sign up to SR?... would we now need to verify that address with ID, SSN, and a utility bill?
And if you made it a general location, that would be useless except for the scammers in the sticks... and even then, how do you know it's not just a different person? Are you gonna start blacklisting NYC, LA, Chicago, because some guy tried to scam you from there?
I do not like this idea one bit.
Not a specific address, a general geographical location. I'll ignore the rest of your nonsense about SSN utility etc. No method is fool proof, but vendors need tools to stop the 'no show - please reship' scammers, that we are seeing more of.
-
Jesse fuck off to Atlantis if you don't like it. You're like a whining bitch, moaning. Until you prove you're outstanding then you're getting 4/5 like everyone else understand. Do you really think you're something special? You're a two for a penny vendor, you wont be missed. And your English is atrocious. Glad you have seen sense and started posting correctly, not taking up the whole page. Fucking Albanian twit.
All the vendors crying like little bitches this is for you: Gone are the days when you fucking blackmail poor buyers. You are getting 4/5 from now on. try and blackmail us into a 5/5 and your ass wont touch the ground, you will be kicked the fuck to Atlantis.
Cheeky bastards, you're lucky you can deal drugs and not go to jail, or get robbed or the thousand other dangers when dealing. Now stop your whingeing and be grateful.
I remember when the site first started, people were grateful, DPR you could give these dogs free vendor accounts and free drugs, and they would still find something to moan about.
-
Plus I would add a general geographical location of buyer location as it is far too easy to set up a clean account and get products delivered to the same or very near address in a locality, and the cycle starts again.
So LE can just sign up for a vendor account and go through SR recording all our addresses? No thanks. "Same or very near address" implies that you'd want this to be a specific address. Would we have to register that address once we sign up to SR?... would we now need to verify that address with ID, SSN, and a utility bill?
And if you made it a general location, that would be useless except for the scammers in the sticks... and even then, how do you know it's not just a different person? Are you gonna start blacklisting NYC, LA, Chicago, because some guy tried to scam you from there?
I do not like this idea one bit.
Not a specific address, a general geographical location. I'll ignore the rest of your nonsense about SSN utility etc. No method is fool proof, but vendors need tools to stop the 'no show - please reship' scammers, that we are seeing more of.
Ok, but I addressed the idea of general location as well. So you're telling me if someone from NYC asks you for a reship, you're going to ban the whole city?
Why not just use your own personal discretion when accepting orders? You'll see the address at that moment, right? If the buyer seems sketchy, and you think it's the same scammer that tried to fuck with you before, don't sell to him. You don't have to accept every order. No need for the whole community to be put at risk because some don't want to take the 10 seconds to decrypt buyer addresses.
Even making the general location of the buyer visible to just any vendor puts people at risk imo... it's just helping LE close in on us.
-
I THINK THIS IS A SOLID IDEA AND I HAVENT SEEN ANYONE POST SOMETHING SIMILAR.
It could be improved upon, but its just a basic idea. It would ensure that someone who should be leaving a good rating, is leaving a rating within the "good" rating threshold
This could be used for BOTH buyers and vendors alike.
Say the scale is 1 to 10. 10 being perfect, 1 being shit. There could be multiple thresholds within the scale. 7+ being a good rating, 4-7 being medium, and <4 being subpar. Vendor and Buyers would only be able to see which of these categories the person placed them in. Say someone received their order, product was 10/10, but shipping was 30+ days and was slightly underweight. The buyer could leave any rating within the 7-10 range and the vendor would only be able to see that the buyer put them in the 7+ category. This keeps the vendor happy, because he knows he got AT LEAST a 7/10 and the buyer is not being a cocksucker that left him a 1 just to be an asshole. But there is that range within the 7-10 that the buyer will be able to rate anonymously. Something like this would be able to keep ratings more accurate and honest in my opinion.
Heres an example for a review that a vendor could leave a buyer:
Say the buyer places his order. Places order properly with pgp encryption and all information needed for the vendor to complete the order. International order. 2 weeks go buy and the buyer is spamming the vendor with messages about how he wants a reship right away. the buyer thinks he got scammed. 2 days later, the pack shows up, and the buyer finalizes. Buyer contacts vendor and apologizes for acting like a little girl. Promises he wont be a little bitch again and that you are his new favorite vendor and would take multiple cumshots to the back of the throat for him because his product is so fire. Vendor could leave something like a 7 or an 8, because the customer finalized on arrival, didnt attempt to tear your reputation apart on the forums, left you a solid review, but did whine like a child after only 2 weeks on an international order for a large amount of drugs. The buyer would only be able to know that the vendor left a 7+, but will not be able to see what the exact number is.
This method would give much more meaning to a vendors' and buyers' ratings. In this case, a vendor/buyer with a 9/10 average will actually probably be better than someone with a 7.3 rating. A person's rating would actually mean something... I wouldn't have to read the forums for a week at a time before I make a purchase. Maybe even the review of that specific transaction could remain anonymous to just each other until BOTH of them wrote a review for each other. that could prevent a cat and mouse game between each other of "who is going to write the better review, first?".
-
I agree with the fear that reviewing Customers means Customers are being bullied/pressured into 5/5 ratings even when they do not deserve them.
For example. I buy some weed. Vendor claims it is AAA and next-day dispatch. It's B-grade at best - damp, gnarly-smelling, little THC - and takes a week to arrive (which pretty much never happens where I live in the UK, I've had enough SR/Amazon/Ebay orders to be quite confident of that). So, when the weed perhaps I message the Vendor about it. When they don't respond, I Finalize anyway.
What does that Vendor deserve? 2/5? 3/5? I'd struggle to give that weed 4/5.
Would I really get a 5/5 rating as a Customer? Get real. I'd get a 1/5, ESPECIALLY FROM THE SORT OF VENDOR WHO SENDS DAMP WEED A WEEK LATER.
But as a Customer I've done everything right. I've tried to communicate with the Vendor. I've Finalized (paid). I've been honest.
But no way in fucking hell would that Vendor rate me 5/5 if I gave them an honestly poor review.
At this rate I'd create a second "don't give a fuck" account to buy from smaller Vendors, or simply not risk ordering from them and concentrate my BTCs on the EMPIRE BUSINESS Vendors such as Technohippy.
Which would be a shame because I'm actively trying to spread my purchases over many Vendors in appreciation of the range of them.
TL;DR - I can understand the motivation behind this proposal but it has NOT been thought through.
-
I don't envy DPR and crew the task of making buyer feedback a reality. I'm not sure what I think is best yet.
I would like to be able to see buyer feedback from vendors when a buyer orders.
I would also like to see the last ten feedback comments the buyer left for any vendors (if any).
I also would like a way to see any feedback from my last ten transactions with that buyer. I delete everything as I should, but, would like the data at hand.
Though, as a vendor, I do want to see buyer feedback, I see a lot of likely troubles with it.
If all feedback is permanent, I think both sides will tend not to leave even slightly negative feedback first. So, negative feedback and ratings would become less common. I think that would be a problem. I think feedback in general would be reduced significantly as well (while both sides wait for the other to rate first).
If we vendors say anything about a buyer as text, I think they should be able to text some response. I think a limit on these texts of around 15 words would be a good idea. I would only allow one comment from each side. I think I would allow them both to be edited for some time period that begins after the buyer responds to a vendor's comment. Vendor comments about a buyer should probably lead to a message to the buyer from SR with the comment details so they know the feedback was posted. I think a buyer-response would also need to be messaged to the vendor so they know the buyer responded. This is all so complicated, I think I do like the suggestions to simplify the system so there is no texting back and forth.
Having rating options like these might be good:
Timely finalized? 1 2 3 4 5
Arrived first time? 1 2 3 4 5
Reasonable expectations? 1 2 3 4 5
Smooth transaction? 1 2 3 4 5
Happy to work with again? 1 2 3 4 5
It might be good to have them be separate so that each one can be rated when the vendor has a reason to do so.
I think I like the small buyer-bond (automatically added to first purchase?) idea to reduce the tendency of buyers to start new accounts after each negative feedback.
-
I would add a general geographical location of buyer location as it is far too easy to set up a clean account and get products delivered to the same or very near address in a locality, and the cycle starts again.
I don't see why we need a location in the buyers feedback since they send us their address with the order. I may be missing something.
It would be nice to have a SR system that lets us know previous account names/feedback for orders to the same address - but that would require SR save addresses in a database (not OK).
-
I agree with the fear that reviewing Customers means Customers are being bullied/pressured into 5/5 ratings even when they do not deserve them.
For example. I buy some weed. Vendor claims it is AAA and next-day dispatch. It's B-grade at best - damp, gnarly-smelling, little THC - and takes a week to arrive (which pretty much never happens where I live in the UK, I've had enough SR/Amazon/Ebay orders to be quite confident of that). So, when the weed perhaps I message the Vendor about it. When they don't respond, I Finalize anyway.
What does that Vendor deserve? 2/5? 3/5? I'd struggle to give that weed 4/5.
Would I really get a 5/5 rating as a Customer? Get real. I'd get a 1/5, ESPECIALLY FROM THE SORT OF VENDOR WHO SENDS DAMP WEED A WEEK LATER.
But as a Customer I've done everything right. I've tried to communicate with the Vendor. I've Finalized (paid). I've been honest.
But no way in fucking hell would that Vendor rate me 5/5 if I gave them an honestly poor review.
At this rate I'd create a second "don't give a fuck" account to buy from smaller Vendors, or simply not risk ordering from them and concentrate my BTCs on the EMPIRE BUSINESS Vendors such as Technohippy.
Which would be a shame because I'm actively trying to spread my purchases over many Vendors in appreciation of the range of them.
TL;DR - I can understand the motivation behind this proposal but it has NOT been thought through.
I feel the same way, which is why I think that buyer's/vendor's should not be able to see the other's rating until after they have both left ratings which are permanent. This will remove the fear of receiving a bad rep from a buyer/vendor because of honest feedback given.
-
Hello......I have to agree and give a +1 to WhiteShark here.......I do not like the ability of the buyer to change their name when leaving feedback.....really it serves no purpose :o
Now as far as a buyers ratings system......That would be very beneficial for buyers and vendors alike.......right now we have lots of new buyers coming to SR daily.......lots of them are turned away from being able to purchase from many vendors because of their low SR stats......and then there are excellent buyers who deserve an excellent 5/5 rating and something written about them.......I know this to be true, as I have many of these buyers as customers.....I know i would take the time to rate every buyer that purchases from me.......as this system will give both buyers and vendors excellent information to make better decisions as to who to work with.
This will also.....ferret out all the lazy, scamer, rude, bullying, gansta, auto-finalizing, etc., etc, etc, etc, etc, buyers......once those ratings are left for those buyers....everyone will have the information their need to make informed decisions
Hey DPR
Just wanted to voice my concern and opinion.
Regarding the new system, I love it and agree with it and everything you mentioned. However my only concern is that we can no longer see which customer left what feedback. With this it is hard to leave a feedback for a vendor. For example a buyer leaves negative feedback without contacting you.
Now I want to leave feedback for this buyer saying "left negative feedback without contact to make it right". However I do not know which buyer left this feedback, so how do I rate the buyer if I do not know which feedback belongs to which buyer?
I think THIS needs to be address. Other then that I love the new discussion board and I think with time ratings will level out and the solid vendors can be distinguished from the mediocre ones. Before transactions were lost and hidden and it was hard to gauge a buyer. These improvements have been awesome, keep in mind you are dealing with a bunch of addicts and drug dealers, among them scammers and sleazebags and anything that is going to make scamming more difficult is likely to receive a negative response. (Not saying everyone who hates the new system is a scammer, however don't be surprised if a large majority are - because scamming buyers and vendors would hate this new system)
-
Jesse fuck off to Atlantis if you don't like it. You're like a whining bitch, moaning. Until you prove you're outstanding then you're getting 4/5 like everyone else understand. Do you really think you're something special? You're a two for a penny vendor, you wont be missed. And your English is atrocious. Glad you have seen sense and started posting correctly, not taking up the whole page. Fucking Albanian twit.
All the vendors crying like little bitches this is for you: Gone are the days when you fucking blackmail poor buyers. You are getting 4/5 from now on. try and blackmail us into a 5/5 and your ass wont touch the ground, you will be kicked the fuck to Atlantis.
Cheeky bastards, you're lucky you can deal drugs and not go to jail, or get robbed or the thousand other dangers when dealing. Now stop your whingeing and be grateful.
I remember when the site first started, people were grateful, DPR you could give these dogs free vendor accounts and free drugs, and they would still find something to moan about.
Who or what gives you the right to speak to people like this, when they have been INVITED to share their opinions..? Perhaps YOU should go to Atlantis. Or Hell, for that matter. Civility costs nothing.
-
Ok, but I addressed the idea of general location as well. So you're telling me if someone from NYC asks you for a reship, you're going to ban the whole city?
Why not just use your own personal discretion when accepting orders? You'll see the address at that moment, right? If the buyer seems sketchy, and you think it's the same scammer that tried to fuck with you before, don't sell to him. You don't have to accept every order. No need for the whole community to be put at risk because some don't want to take the 10 seconds to decrypt buyer addresses.
Even making the general location of the buyer visible to just any vendor puts people at risk imo... it's just helping LE close in on us.
It's probably best not to sensationalise in extremis to try and force through your opinion.
Vendors shouldn't keep addresses at all - so unless you have some kind of 'rain man recollection', seeing an address isn't going to do anything for you there. I'm not thinking of banning whole swathes of the country or any particular continent (though it does get extremely tempting sometimes on the forum)
What I am talking about is an aide memoire for vendors to help make that judgement call where there are known areas of repeat reship scammers.
-
All excellent ideas......+1
As a vendor some thoughts:
1) As i have become more established and moved up the rankings, I have so much business I am not going to be blackmailing buyers etc etc. Who has the fucking time? I am making good money, i don't need any of that shit, i have a good rep cause i sell good shit, and 99% of customers are awesome. Buyers...seriously....any well rated vendor on here is too busy and making too much money to try and fuck with you. We don't need to.
2) The buyers blacklist, whilst helpful, is too hard to keep up with
3) 99% OF PROBLEM BUYERS I HAVE HAD, HAD LESS THAN 5 TRANSACTIONS. So unfortunately, now i just don't deal with them for anything more than $100. Think the reality is there is a very small sub set of immature fuckhead buyers who just keep creating new accounts, in order to try and scam a free transaction. Probably broke ass kids.
4) Point 3 sucks for genuine new buyers, but i figure they can buy a few small things off me first to develop a relationship, and it shouldn't be too hard on them, and if they are fuckheads, 1/5 reviews on small sales don't matter to me.
5) Given point 3, the only things i now really need to rate buyers on is:
a) did they finalise in a timely manner, and
b) were they rude / demanding / annoying and thus would i deal with them again.
Give us a yes / no answer to those two questions, and a percentage rating for them both when dealing with customers, and i'll be happy as a pig in shit
*** as an extra idea, one that i know will never fly......make buyers pay $20 to sign up. Will stop the endless new accounts from the same people. Paid back when they hit 6 weeks and $500 of buys.
**** as an aside...the only problem i have had with buyer who was not a newbie, was somebody who was very old, with excellent stats, who wanted a freeby. A few vendors have had problems like this i think, these heavy weights know their feedback carries alot of weight. Clicking no on the "would u deal with this buyer again" would suffice for this i think, no need to have to write anything etc etc. Not a common problem though
-
Say the scale is 1 to 10. 10 being perfect, 1 being shit. There could be multiple thresholds within the scale. 7+ being a good rating, 4-7 being medium, and <4 being subpar. Vendor and Buyers would only be able to see which of these categories the person placed them in. Say someone received their order, product was 10/10, but shipping was 30+ days and was slightly underweight. The buyer could leave any rating within the 7-10 range and the vendor would only be able to see that the buyer put them in the 7+ category. This keeps the vendor happy, because he knows he got AT LEAST a 7/10 and the buyer is not being a cocksucker that left him a 1 just to be an asshole. But there is that range within the 7-10 that the buyer will be able to rate anonymously. Something like this would be able to keep ratings more accurate and honest in my opinion.
...
This method would give much more meaning to a vendors' and buyers' ratings. In this case, a vendor/buyer with a 9/10 average will actually probably be better than someone with a 7.3 rating. A person's rating would actually mean something... I wouldn't have to read the forums for a week at a time before I make a purchase. Maybe even the review of that specific transaction could remain anonymous to just each other until BOTH of them wrote a review for each other. that could prevent a cat and mouse game between each other of "who is going to write the better review, first?".
It's an overhaul, but I think this is a very solid idea.
-
I liked it when I could click "view feedback". Then I could see in order the feedback that was recently left for me by people that just recently finalized. For me its harder to find the recent feedback. And therefore harder for me to address any problems the buyer may have had. I like staying on top of it.
-
Due to the fact the vendor may potentially hold the buyer's name and address I don't think vendors should have the ability to add specific information to the buyer's profile as part of a review. I know that most vendors of course wouldn't dream of doing something like this; mainly because the vendors I've dealt with seem like decent people who just wouldn't because it's wrong, coupled with the fact that they'd probably get booted from the site for pulling a stunt like that, but let's just say a vendor was going to flame out anyway...point is it could happen and would happen (even if only rarely), so it should be prevented. I like the idea of a few simple yes/no questions or perhaps a dropdown box of various buyer traits, good and bad, that could be tagged to the review.
-
Due to the fact the vendor may potentially hold the buyer's name and address I don't think vendors should have the ability to add specific information to the buyer's profile as part of a review. I know that most vendors of course wouldn't dream of doing something like this; mainly because the vendors I've dealt with seem like decent people who just wouldn't because it's wrong, coupled with the fact that they'd probably get booted from the site for pulling a stunt like that, but let's just say a vendor was going to flame out anyway...point is it could happen and would happen (even if only rarely), so it should be prevented. I like the idea of a few simple yes/no questions or perhaps a dropdown box of various buyer traits, good and bad, that could be tagged to the review.
In that case, due to the fact that buyers have return addresses used and stealth details of vendors, buyers should not be able to leave a feedback comment anymore. Hell, lets get rid of Silk Road forums because vendors and buyers can both post these types of things on here. ::)
-
I personally like the old way,
because most buyers finalize and rate before testing the product to see if it even deserves a 5/5
and then they'res no way of changing it if the product is shit (which sucks bad Dread Pirate)
So end the end, always SAMPLE YOUR PRODUCT BEFORE FINALIZING PERIOD>
to see if it really deserves the good rating or not.
thats just how i feel about it!
-
I personally don't believe EVERY BUYER should be rated. That would be time-consuming and unnecessary as most Buyers are fine honorable people. However if certain bad behavior could be flagged for exceptional cases. Such as:
Awkward, Rude, Threatening Extortion (to give bad feedback unless some freebie is given), Possible Scammer, Actual Scammer
Each time that a Buyer gets flagged in this way a Total would be built. So a Scammer would soon be detected, just by the simple expedient of multiple Vendors saying they were a possible scammer. ie. They claimed multiple times to have not received Goods.
This would hopefully give most Vendors all the info they need.
What do other people think?
-
Dpr I think that making a system for vendors so we can judge our buyers better beforehand, possibly even with a "buyer page" , which contains their transactions, with how many seperate vendors etc, alongside a section where they can include their PGP key. Not a page where they can write what they want, Just somewhere they can include their pgp etc.
Having some sort of system to allow us to better judge buyers would be very beneficial. The main reason being that way we can set up guidelines for new buyers which would deal with potential scammers creating new accounts, and we can focus on buyers with history and get a better understanding of them.
SynthesisWizard
-
So end the end, always SAMPLE YOUR PRODUCT BEFORE FINALIZING PERIOD to see if it really deserves the good rating or not.
That's fine for a joint, but what about getting LSD when (due to my job) I can, at best, only take it once a week. Assuming I'm "LSD-free" that one day? Am I supposed to keep a Vendor's BTCs in Escrow for another week, possibly two?
Don't like that idea. Can't think many Vendors would either, especially if BTCs were in decline over that period.
I personally don't believe EVERY BUYER should be rated. That would be time-consuming and unnecessary as most Buyers are fine honorable people. However if certain bad behavior could be flagged for exceptional cases. Such as: Awkward, Rude, Threatening Extortion (to give bad feedback unless some freebie is given), Possible Scammer, Actual Scammer
Each time that a Buyer gets flagged in this way a Total would be built. So a Scammer would soon be detected, just by the simple expedient of multiple Vendors saying they were a possible scammer. ie. They claimed multiple times to have not received Goods. This would hopefully give most Vendors all the info they need. What do other people think?
I think that's an excellent idea. Worthy of further consideration.
-
Im just happy for the ability to use this site
-
Dpr I think that making a system for vendors so we can judge our buyers better beforehand, possibly even with a "buyer page" , which contains their transactions, with how many seperate vendors etc, alongside a section where they can include their PGP key. Not a page where they can write what they want, Just somewhere they can include their pgp etc.
Having some sort of system to allow us to better judge buyers would be very beneficial. The main reason being that way we can set up guidelines for new buyers which would deal with potential scammers creating new accounts, and we can focus on buyers with history and get a better understanding of them.
SynthesisWizard
I think too much info is going the wrong way... buyers have to attach to an address so big time buyers would be a juicy target for LE with what you are saying
I rather see buyers put up a bond like the other guy said, something even more than $20, maybe $100 and vendors can protect themselves more by selling small amounts to new buyers
using math to weed out the issue is better. Less scammers if they have higher cost of entry and have to settle for small purchases.
tl:dr there is no perfect mousetrap, but the best ones keep it simple
-
I think for buyer feedback a vendor leaves just a positive or negative score would be all thats needed.
positive = you would sell to them again
negative = you wouldnt recommend anyone sell to them
and maybe a field to leave comments.
problem is, if the buyer can see the feedback SR support will be getting lots of requests to change "unfair feedback" blah blah.
More importantly... please shorten auto-finalize for domestic orders. Maybe just add a button you can click for each order to make it domestic and then the auto finalize is like 7 days or something.. pls pls :)
-
So end the end, always SAMPLE YOUR PRODUCT BEFORE FINALIZING PERIOD to see if it really deserves the good rating or not.
That's fine for a joint, but what about getting LSD when (due to my job) I can, at best, only take it once a week. Assuming I'm "LSD-free" that one day? Am I supposed to keep a Vendor's BTCs in Escrow for another week, possibly two?
Don't like that idea. Can't think many Vendors would either, especially if BTCs were in decline over that period.
I personally don't believe EVERY BUYER should be rated. That would be time-consuming and unnecessary as most Buyers are fine honorable people. However if certain bad behavior could be flagged for exceptional cases. Such as: Awkward, Rude, Threatening Extortion (to give bad feedback unless some freebie is given), Possible Scammer, Actual Scammer
Each time that a Buyer gets flagged in this way a Total would be built. So a Scammer would soon be detected, just by the simple expedient of multiple Vendors saying they were a possible scammer. ie. They claimed multiple times to have not received Goods. This would hopefully give most Vendors all the info they need. What do other people think?
I think that's an excellent idea. Worthy of further consideration.
I do think its a fair iidea, order the acid when you are about to take it, not two weeks in advance, take a little hit or even half just to see if its real or some kind of nbome product... idk, one time i ordered some 'mdma' lowest price on the road!
tasted like it kinda, so I finalized outta excitedness but i just couldnt get high,
I talked to another SR vendor and that he was convienced it was methylone(M1)
low and behold it was methylone he was selling to his buyers and about 28 a gram, he made a fortune.
his rating got so low, (thats why I like the rating where you can change it after you ingest to see if its good shit or not..
Low and behold i gave a 1/5 because he knowingly sold me fake shit,,
so to make a long story short one of the people that works with him said if i change it back to 5/5 and just say them mad sometype of mistake on the sellers, a miscommunication, that he would refund my money in full.
So yeah thats how I think the feedback should work, and thats the way i prefer it..
and be careful the acid on the road will fucking fry your brains out, i had some of Silo;s shit and almost went insane lo no joke
-
Buyer feedback is a good idea and would definitely work.
A number rating isn't necessary but the ability for vendors to leave a review would be good. Most probably wouldn't bother to even leave them unless they felt it was necessary to warn other vendors. I also do not think the vendor should be able to use an alias, it should be their vendor name and this information should only be made available alongside the buyer stats when a buyer places an order with a vendor.
-
I personally like the old way,
because most buyers finalize and rate before testing the product to see if it even deserves a 5/5
and then they'res no way of changing it if the product is shit (which sucks bad Dread Pirate)
So end the end, always SAMPLE YOUR PRODUCT BEFORE FINALIZING PERIOD>
to see if it really deserves the good rating or not.
...
One of the great things about the recent changes is how finalization and giving feedback are no longer linked.
You can finalize in a timely manner and leave feedback and a rating after you try the product.
There is no need to push people to finalize late. People, often, still do rate transactions before they know for sure how good it was. I agree people should try stuff before they assume it is great or bad. Honest fact-based feedback/ratings/reviews are what we all need :-)
-
So end the end, always SAMPLE YOUR PRODUCT BEFORE FINALIZING PERIOD to see if it really deserves the good rating or not.
That's fine for a joint, but what about getting LSD when (due to my job) I can, at best, only take it once a week. Assuming I'm "LSD-free" that one day? Am I supposed to keep a Vendor's BTCs in Escrow for another week, possibly two?
Don't like that idea. Can't think many Vendors would either, especially if BTCs were in decline over that period.
I personally don't believe EVERY BUYER should be rated. That would be time-consuming and unnecessary as most Buyers are fine honorable people. However if certain bad behavior could be flagged for exceptional cases. Such as: Awkward, Rude, Threatening Extortion (to give bad feedback unless some freebie is given), Possible Scammer, Actual Scammer
Each time that a Buyer gets flagged in this way a Total would be built. So a Scammer would soon be detected, just by the simple expedient of multiple Vendors saying they were a possible scammer. ie. They claimed multiple times to have not received Goods. This would hopefully give most Vendors all the info they need. What do other people think?
I think that's an excellent idea. Worthy of further consideration.
I do think its a fair iidea, order the acid when you are about to take it, not two weeks in advance, take a little hit or even half just to see if its real or some kind of nbome product... idk, one time i ordered some 'mdma' lowest price on the road!
tasted like it kinda, so I finalized outta excitedness but i just couldnt get high,
I talked to another SR vendor and that he was convienced it was methylone(M1)
low and behold it was methylone he was selling to his buyers and about 28 a gram, he made a fortune.
his rating got so low, (thats why I like the rating where you can change it after you ingest to see if its good shit or not..
Low and behold i gave a 1/5 because he knowingly sold me fake shit,,
so to make a long story short one of the people that works with him said if i change it back to 5/5 and just say them mad sometype of mistake on the sellers, a miscommunication, that he would refund my money in full.
So yeah that's how I think the feedback should work, and thats the way i prefer it..
and be careful the acid on the road will fucking fry your brains out, i had some of Silo;s shit and almost went insane lo no joke
Jesse, I see you're knocking shills out now. Annie Jesse, at least try and mask your identity by posting in sentences instead of nursery rhymes. And use 2 syllables in your name.
Busted now sign in properly.
And it's' to cut a long story short' not as you so comically put it ' make a long story short' subtle hints that show your true identity.
-
DPR, it seems like the best course would be to agree with some of the suggestions that may require a reworking of the system, or a few brilliant ideas that can just be added to balance everything out.
Some veteran vendors seem displeased, maybe add to their recognition a badge system can be put in place (like ebay).
"Top 10%"
"100+ Transactions"
"Trusted Vendor"
"Founding Vendor"
That way the existing system can exist, while adding some prestige and recognition to the veteran vendors who have helped support SR and provided quality service. These badges (text or icon) can be obtained via number of years on SR, or tx's, or rating.
-
So end the end, always SAMPLE YOUR PRODUCT BEFORE FINALIZING PERIOD to see if it really deserves the good rating or not.
That's fine for a joint, but what about getting LSD when (due to my job) I can, at best, only take it once a week. Assuming I'm "LSD-free" that one day? Am I supposed to keep a Vendor's BTCs in Escrow for another week, possibly two?
Don't like that idea. Can't think many Vendors would either, especially if BTCs were in decline over that period.
I personally don't believe EVERY BUYER should be rated. That would be time-consuming and unnecessary as most Buyers are fine honorable people. However if certain bad behavior could be flagged for exceptional cases. Such as: Awkward, Rude, Threatening Extortion (to give bad feedback unless some freebie is given), Possible Scammer, Actual Scammer
Each time that a Buyer gets flagged in this way a Total would be built. So a Scammer would soon be detected, just by the simple expedient of multiple Vendors saying they were a possible scammer. ie. They claimed multiple times to have not received Goods. This would hopefully give most Vendors all the info they need. What do other people think?
I think that's an excellent idea. Worthy of further consideration.
I do think its a fair iidea, order the acid when you are about to take it, not two weeks in advance, take a little hit or even half just to see if its real or some kind of nbome product... idk, one time i ordered some 'mdma' lowest price on the road!
tasted like it kinda, so I finalized outta excitedness but i just couldnt get high,
I talked to another SR vendor and that he was convienced it was methylone(M1)
low and behold it was methylone he was selling to his buyers and about 28 a gram, he made a fortune.
his rating got so low, (thats why I like the rating where you can change it after you ingest to see if its good shit or not..
Low and behold i gave a 1/5 because he knowingly sold me fake shit,,
so to make a long story short one of the people that works with him said if i change it back to 5/5 and just say them mad sometype of mistake on the sellers, a miscommunication, that he would refund my money in full.
So yeah that's how I think the feedback should work, and thats the way i prefer it..
and be careful the acid on the road will fucking fry your brains out, i had some of Silo;s shit and almost went insane lo no joke
Jesse, I see you're knocking shills out now. Annie Jesse, at least try and mask your identity by posting in sentences instead of nursery rhymes. And use 2 syllables in your name.
Busted now sign in properly.
And it's' to cut a long story short' not as you so comically put it ' make a long story short' subtle hints that show your true identity.
I didnt under a damned word yu said John lol, the baptist
-
What are buyer ratings really going to change?
Without ratings, if I don't give a vendor a 5, I get blacklisted. With, if I don't give them a 5 I get a bad rating.
Without ratings, if I make a new account and scam a vendor, it would be the same as a new account with ratings.
If I have an old account and scam a vendor, then will that one bad feedback do more than being blacklisted?
While there are asshole buyers out there, there are also asshole vendors.
Also, let me edit feedback for fucks sake. Its ridiculous that someone earlier said that a buyer should either not order in advance or take a little LSD on work night to test and and then finalize. I guess I'm okay with not reviewing the quality of a product, but that hurts the vendor in the long run. I'm not going to buy a product with just a timely delivery in the feedback. I want to know quality is right.
Which I guess gives us a reason for buyer feedback. If you can leave a note on a scamming buyer that hes a dick, that may help. But it doesn't give me a good feeling about leaving any feedback other than a 5 and having my built up stats ruined by some vendor.
Guess that goes both ways though....
-
I do think its a fair iidea, order the acid when you are about to take it, not two weeks in advance, take a little hit or even half just to see if its real
This is helpful when I'm ordering Cher's microdots from Spain exactly how?
-
No matter what DPR decides, he won't make everyone happy.
I have seen some good suggestions in here and some bad ones, and a lot of bitching and complaining.
In my opinion, vendors should be able to rate buyers, but I don't think it needs to be on the 5/5 scale. I think vendors should should simply have one button: Would you sell to this buyer again? [Yes]/[No]
What Vendors should also be able to see is the ratings that buyers have left for vendors. I don't mean specifically for each vendor, I just mean the percentage of 1/5, 2/5, 3/5, 4/5, 5/5's left. If a certain buyer leaves a large percentage of 1/5's or 2/5's, then I wouldn't want to deal with him. Conversely, if he leaves a large percentage of 4/5's, 5/5's, I would sell to him.
In order to determine if he wants to sell to an individual buyer, the vendor should be able to see the following information when a buyer places an order:
Sign-up date or Membership Length
# of Orders
$ Spent Total
# Vendors Total
% Refunds
% Autofinalize
% Would Sell to Again
% 5/5's left
% 4/5's left
% 3/5's left
% 2/5's left
% 1/5's left
Most of this information is already there.
I'm not sure how I feel about requiring new buyer accounts to put down a deposit before placing orders. I think I am leaning toward this idea. Perhaps a new account could be required to deposit $50 or so. Then after certain requirements are met (Member for 3 months, spent so much $, less than 10% autofinalize, greater than 90% Would-Sell-To-Again, or at least 3 of the 4) the account gets its deposit back (in bitcoins). Obviously these are probably not the actual number values that should be used. But it gets the point across.
Thanks for reading,
shroomin1
-
I do not think it will work very well.
I think the buyer´s stats gives enough info about the buyer.
Heatcheck said:
"Without ratings, if I don't give a vendor a 5, I get blacklisted.
With, if I don't give them a 5 I get a bad rating."
So, What are buyer ratings really going to change?
-
I do think its a fair iidea, order the acid when you are about to take it, not two weeks in advance, take a little hit or even half just to see if its real
This is helpful when I'm ordering Cher's microdots from Spain exactly how?
For reputable vendors such as Cher (who already many people on the Avengers list have bought from, etc), when it's clear the product is legitimate, I will usually give the benefit of the doubt and finalize, provide 5/5 if everything went smoothly, and wait until I try the product later to write the review. However, I do believe it is possible to finalize and release escrow without rating the transaction yet, so, if you don't trust the vendor for some reason or they have few reviews from others, you can wait until you try the product to leave the rating.
-
I do think its a fair iidea, order the acid when you are about to take it, not two weeks in advance, take a little hit or even half just to see if its real
This is helpful when I'm ordering Cher's microdots from Spain exactly how?
well if youve had cher's shit before you obviously know its real, if not just have a little test run before you finalize, im sure he wouldnt mind if you finalized next day or something like that, just let him know your situation,,
-
We think this is NOT needed and get too complicated now.
If adopt listing of other feedback ratings given to other vendor, vendor can choose to not use anybody that give any less then 5/5 always. this cause buyers to leave 5/5 even when they should not to avoid black list, and make vendor easier for selective scam.
Don need this and add no need complication. Speak to big buyers and vendors and both agree not need.
-
A buyer feed-back system is not needed. Vendors can see your buyer stats, there are the buyer black lists and vendor discussion groups. Buyer feed-back would add another level of unwanted complication - not to mention the increased potential for conflict and abuse. I am privileged to be part of this community. I promise to do my part in keeping it vital, dynamic and functional.
-
A buyer feed-back system is not needed. Vendors can see your buyer stats, there are the buyer black lists and vendor discussion groups. Buyer feed-back would add another level of unwanted complication - not to mention the increased potential for conflict and abuse. I am privileged to be part of this community. I promise to do my part in keeping it vital, dynamic and functional.
Going by that logic then vendor feedback is not needed either.
-
Thank you everyone for sharing your thoughts on this subject. First off, a couple of posts were made about vendors seeing buyer reviews on your "recent orders" page. This is going to get put back in.
Regarding vendors reviewing buyers, there have been a couple of points brought up that I'd like to focus on. Consider the following scenario: Buyer leaves a 4/5, vendor says remove it or I'll give you a bad rating. To prevent this, it was suggested that vendors not see their rating until they have rated their buyer and vice versa. This sounds like a legitimate option, but I'd like to know if anyone sees a downside to it.
The other point I heard is maybe we really don't need a buyer rating system at all. Vendors can already see a buyer's full stats when they place an order with them. quantity purchased, amount spent, # of vendors, percent of orders left to autofinalize, percent of sales refunded. Let's say we let vendors do a yes or no rating: "would you sell to this buyer again?", and then presented that to future vendors as a percent of sales, such as... 95% would do business again, or 37% would do business again. Would that be helpful? Could vendors abuse this?
As a quick note, some of you have said that vendors wouldn't take the time to rate hundreds of buyers. We could default the rating to "yes, would do business again" and then have a batch process in one click, so all they would need to do is change the bad buyers to "no" and click "rate all". So that's not an issue.
Thanks again for the discussion. Let's focus now on the points I've just raised and move the conversation forward.
-
You should add how many times the buyer has went to resolution so we can see if they attempt to serial scam. We have no way to see that without buyer feedback.
-
Thank you everyone for sharing your thoughts on this subject. First off, a couple of posts were made about vendors seeing buyer reviews on your "recent orders" page. This is going to get put back in.
Regarding vendors reviewing buyers, there have been a couple of points brought up that I'd like to focus on. Consider the following scenario: Buyer leaves a 4/5, vendor says remove it or I'll give you a bad rating. To prevent this, it was suggested that vendors not see their rating until they have rated their buyer and vice versa. This sounds like a legitimate option, but I'd like to know if anyone sees a downside to it.
The other point I heard is maybe we really don't need a buyer rating system at all. Vendors can already see a buyer's full stats when they place an order with them. quantity purchased, amount spent, # of vendors, percent of orders left to autofinalize, percent of sales refunded. Let's say we let vendors do a yes or no rating: "would you sell to this buyer again?", and then presented that to future vendors as a percent of sales, such as... 95% would do business again, or 37% would do business again. Would that be helpful? Could vendors abuse this?
As a quick note, some of you have said that vendors wouldn't take the time to rate hundreds of buyers. We could default the rating to "yes, would do business again" and then have a batch process in one click, so all they would need to do is change the bad buyers to "no" and click "rate all". So that's not an issue.
Thanks again for the discussion. Let's focus now on the points I've just raised and move the conversation forward.
Robbie, never mind all that, If a buyer makes a feedback mistake, they need a window of opportunity to correct. Then it's locked forever.
Give Henry my regards.
t
-
Once a buyer has left a 4/5 they can't edit it, remember that update you just did? If I were a vendor I wouldn't give a buyer a 5/5 if they gave me a 4/5 after I had fulfilled their order exactly as stated in the product description and vendor page; but then again how would vendors know which buyer left what with the aliases.
I do not think there should be a yes or no to do business with again option, but I do think that vendors should at least be able to write a written review of the buyer.
-
Since our buyer stats are already clear I think a simple "trust" and "politeness" feature would work fine. I got on a blacklist once but it was not about how I do business. It was a forum comment that was eventually worked out and I now have a more than solid relationship with the vendor. Maybe stats on how quick we finalize within escrow could be automatically generated. I like to pay the day my gear arrives. Its just the right thing to do.
-
Regarding vendors reviewing buyers, there have been a couple of points brought up that I'd like to focus on. Consider the following scenario: Buyer leaves a 4/5, vendor says remove it or I'll give you a bad rating. To prevent this, it was suggested that vendors not see their rating until they have rated their buyer and vice versa. This sounds like a legitimate option, but I'd like to know if anyone sees a downside to it.
The scammer can just not rate... then nobody can 1/5 him. For brand new scammers this may be obvious, but for people with some legit history that turn scammer, not so much.
Perhaps give us a rating release button. It would post our vendor/buyer rating so as to not let scammers hold us hostage from their side. i.e. keep on scamming without ratings being posted about it. But then were kinda back to zero...
To discourage people from playing the game of waiting out the other side, silently forcing the other to rate/use the button, ensuring that they get a 5 first... if this button is used, a notation should be attributed next to the rating such as (F)orced rating given... or an *... something to note it. Not sure how you'd display this though.
Idk, just a thought.
The other point I heard is maybe we really don't need a buyer rating system at all. Vendors can already see a buyer's full stats when they place an order with them. quantity purchased, amount spent, # of vendors, percent of orders left to autofinalize, percent of sales refunded. Let's say we let vendors do a yes or no rating: "would you sell to this buyer again?", and then presented that to future vendors as a percent of sales, such as... 95% would do business again, or 37% would do business again. Would that be helpful? Could vendors abuse this?
I'd say stay with the 1-5, like with vendors. Sometimes 2, 3, 4 are useful when needed. A simple up/down vote system leaves out this middle ground. For example... I may deal with someone again, yet they're a total pain in the ass.
-
allowing vendors to rate/review their customers after a transaction is complete so other vendors can have a better idea of whether they want to accept them as their customers.
I think we need this feature. Vendors are already keeping and sharing "buyer black lists", but in an inefficient and non transparent way. We should either discourage this, or integrate it into the system and I personally think it should be integrated.
I agree with you, DPR: it's a great idea!
-
DPR ,
You are doing a fantastic job. My input on buyer feedback:
Let the Vendor leave feedback on the Buyer. Let the buyer have an opportunity to REPLY: to the Vendor's feedback.
I think that's real information vendors can use. A 'personal' REPLY.
What do you think?
-
Thank you everyone for sharing your thoughts on this subject. First off, a couple of posts were made about vendors seeing buyer reviews on your "recent orders" page. This is going to get put back in.
Regarding vendors reviewing buyers, there have been a couple of points brought up that I'd like to focus on. Consider the following scenario: Buyer leaves a 4/5, vendor says remove it or I'll give you a bad rating. To prevent this, it was suggested that vendors not see their rating until they have rated their buyer and vice versa. This sounds like a legitimate option, but I'd like to know if anyone sees a downside to it.
The other point I heard is maybe we really don't need a buyer rating system at all. Vendors can already see a buyer's full stats when they place an order with them. quantity purchased, amount spent, # of vendors, percent of orders left to autofinalize, percent of sales refunded. Let's say we let vendors do a yes or no rating: "would you sell to this buyer again?", and then presented that to future vendors as a percent of sales, such as... 95% would do business again, or 37% would do business again. Would that be helpful? Could vendors abuse this?
As a quick note, some of you have said that vendors wouldn't take the time to rate hundreds of buyers. We could default the rating to "yes, would do business again" and then have a batch process in one click, so all they would need to do is change the bad buyers to "no" and click "rate all". So that's not an issue.
Thanks again for the discussion. Let's focus now on the points I've just raised and move the conversation forward.
<<<Let's focus now on the points I've just raised and move the conversation forward.>>>>
How about let's focus on some of the real issues like essentially telling the buyers that the NEW 5/5 is NOW really a 4/5! This is part in parcel of ALL the feedback issues. It needs to be finer tuned (4.7/5) at the very least or you are telling everybody that all of your top vendors were never as good as anyone thought . . . they only rated out at 80%.
So how do you expect rating buyers is going to work if you set it up the same way? There will always be a problem with the flawed feedback system when it is so generic that if a buyer has an issue of any sort he is forced by the system to rate it at 3/5 for something that would have been a 4/5 or even a 5/5 if he had bothered to have a conversation with the vendor to get their perspective!
How about at the very least that a buyer cannot leave less than 5/5 without first messaging the vendor first like most of us vendors have specified on our vendors page! So at least there has been an attempt at fixing an issue that may not even be an issue other than in the mind of an uninformed buyer.
But no matter what, the 5 point grading system is way too general for those of us who take pride in doing their best . . . hopefully there will be some trickledown effect . . . and there will be some major positive modifications to the feeble generic system.
NCK
-
Regarding vendors reviewing buyers, there have been a couple of points brought up that I'd like to focus on. Consider the following scenario: Buyer leaves a 4/5, vendor says remove it or I'll give you a bad rating. To prevent this, it was suggested that vendors not see their rating until they have rated their buyer and vice versa. This sounds like a legitimate option, but I'd like to know if anyone sees a downside to it.
The scammer can just not rate... then nobody can 1/5 him. For brand new scammers this may be obvious, but for people with some legit history that turn scammer, not so much.
Perhaps give us a rating release button. It would post our vendor/buyer rating so as to not let scammers hold us hostage from their side. i.e. keep on scamming without ratings being posted about it. But then were kinda back to zero...
To discourage people from playing the game of waiting out the other side, silently forcing the other to rate/use the button, ensuring that they get a 5 first... if this button is used, a notation should be attributed next to the rating such as (F)orced rating given... or an *... something to note it. Not sure how you'd display this though.
Idk, just a thought.
The other point I heard is maybe we really don't need a buyer rating system at all. Vendors can already see a buyer's full stats when they place an order with them. quantity purchased, amount spent, # of vendors, percent of orders left to autofinalize, percent of sales refunded. Let's say we let vendors do a yes or no rating: "would you sell to this buyer again?", and then presented that to future vendors as a percent of sales, such as... 95% would do business again, or 37% would do business again. Would that be helpful? Could vendors abuse this?
I'd say stay with the 1-5, like with vendors. Sometimes 2, 3, 4 are useful when needed. A simple up/down vote system leaves out this middle ground. For example... I may deal with someone again, yet they're a total pain in the ass.
If a vendor scams, you could have it set so the # effects the vendor's rating immediately and then have a time delay on the vendor's time period to leave a review where it defaults to no review after like 3-5 days (arbitrary) and then the buyer's rating is posted. In addition, maybe make it so that if a vendor has been found to have scammed and once banned, bad reviews on buyers from the vendor are erased as they were most likely as a fuck you to the world.
If the buyer is attempting to scam & generally a horrible customer you could set forth a similar time frame. In response to the obvious "what if products havnt been tried yet" Well, maybe you shouldnt have finalized yet. As a responsible drug user you should probably keep test kits on hand. Otherwise theres no real way to know what you are getting.
-
I would bring old ratings back for vendors and not add buyer ones, why still trying to make something new.
Old SR is old SR.
-
I'd like to thank everyone but especially terpene and Rocknessie for raising some very valid points that concern me. Fortunately as a vendor I don't think I get scammed too much, I'm not sure why but I've had a great run of luck lately and have had no problems other than late finalising because of Tor downtime I suspect.
terpene made the very valid point that as soon as a buyer gets 'negged' buy a vendor they can set up another account. Personally I think the worst solution would be to blacklist areas or regions, it would be ineffective and would potentially punish innocent people.
Rocknessie also made a very valid point that people will be more inclined to 5/5 to get a 5/5 back, the problem is that hiding the feedback until both parties have left it is if the buyer wants to leave a 1/5 and you are happy to try and resolve it then the deed is done and you will never know until you have given them positive feedback potentially(I believe Whiteshark also sort of raised this)
Personally I think a buyer bond may be potentially worth working in. I paid $500 to be here, I got it back by proving myself so a nominal amount like 0.001BTC or an initial deposit that must be spent on SR perhaps of say 0.5BTC to create some sort of personal investment. Perhaps there could be 'bonded' buyers who could be denoted somehow, I know none of these are ideal but I'm trying to think of ways of making it easier for new buyers to get started and harder for sock puppeteering.
One of the main problems I have currently is that with the SR downtime/Tor botnet attacks people can't finalise, perhaps as has been suggested a 7 day auto-finalise period that doesn't penalise buyer stats could be offered in the delivery options? For example when I set the domestic delivery price there is a dropdown menu that gives you a couple of options(7 days, 17 days) but with no punishment for A-F on the 7 days since it can be due to downtime, legitimate personal stuff, etc. This also leaves the option of paying slightly extra for 17 days to finalise should the customer desire, for an extra few £/$ I wouldn't mind as much when people finalise late.
There are no perfect solutions but I think a vendor being able to put notes on a buyer of some kind to inform other vendors of any situation that may have occurred. For example if a person has a re-send you don't want to punish the people who legitimately deserve it but if I could pop a note on a page for other vendors with their buyer stats just saying something like 'all seemed legit but did need resend, otherwise fine.' that would be enough for other vendors to be wary of re-sends to that individual and the resolution center would be aware of it in future. I'm not a big fan of 'blacklists' and geo-bans and I don't want to see the innocent punished, personally I think simply being able to leave some kind of text with notes would be enough and would avoid blackmailing, etc.
I really don't envy the position DPR is in, trying to run a self-policing system based around anonymity is no small task. So far I must say that my first 6 months here have been the most rewarding and fulfilling of my life, thank you for providing me with that opportunity. I'm sure whatever we end up with we will figure out ways of making it work in a reasonable manner.
Again thanks to everyone who has been posting informed responses in this thread, it has got me thinking.
Jah Bless
The Doctor
-
The buyer bond idea is excellent, this will do 2 other things, 1 encourage buyers to be more honest as they wouldnt want to loose their bond and 2 stop underage buyer signing up, something like $250-$300 buyer bond sounds fair.
At the moment I am not finding this new system any more helpful, the fact that feedback cant be edited is annoying, I waited around 2 weeks before I leave my feedback now and make sure I preview it a few times, not a major problem, but I did prefer the old way.
The only good thing is that old feedback can now be seen.
Buyer stats will help no end, it makes perfect sense to have buyer stats too.
-
Personally feel that implementing buyer ratings would be a brilliant idea, obviously there are potential problems for buyers with this proposal (vendor blackmail) - but conversely the same problems currently exist for vendors (buyer ratings is an excellent way to address this power inbalance).
Another solution that could be used to resolve buyers blackmailing vendors (and if this system is implemented - vendors blackmailing buyers) would be to widen feedback disputes beyond security concerns. At present buyers can demand what is well beyond a reasonable expectation and threaten to leave bad feedback/ratings if they are not appeased (or leave bad feedback/ratings to make demands for their willingness to remove it). Vendors are greatly limited in how they can respond to this situation which creates another problem - new buyers, or buyers with low stats, find it harder to make purchases. By having the option to have a moderator (third party) come in and inspect the legitamacy of a transaction grievance an avenue for dealing with scammers (beyond blacklisting and ratings) is created and a deterrent for behaviours not wanted on Silkroad put in place. Obviously this would greatly inflate the workload of Silkroad moderators and only DPR would know whether this suggestion is feasible or not - just want to throw the idea out there (don't hate ;P)
-
Let's say we let vendors do a yes or no rating: "would you sell to this buyer again?", and then presented that to future vendors as a percent of sales, such as... 95% would do business again, or 37% would do business again. Would that be helpful? Could vendors abuse this?
As a quick note, some of you have said that vendors wouldn't take the time to rate hundreds of buyers. We could default the rating to "yes, would do business again" and then have a batch process in one click, so all they would need to do is change the bad buyers to "no" and click "rate all". So that's not an issue.
Thanks again for the discussion. Let's focus now on the points I've just raised and move the conversation forward.
Yes that seems perfect to me. :-)
-
I do think its a fair iidea, order the acid when you are about to take it, not two weeks in advance, take a little hit or even half just to see if its real
This is helpful when I'm ordering Cher's microdots from Spain exactly how?
well if youve had cher's shit before you obviously know its real, if not just have a little test run before you finalize, im sure he wouldnt mind if you finalized next day or something like that, just let him know your situation,,
I repeat, mine is a driving job. It can be a week, even two, before I have that availability.
-
Yea buyer rating does leave the buyer open to retaliation and blackmail.
Just like vendors are left open to retaliation and blackmail right? ::)
A vendor with an established reputation doesn't really have to worry about being blackmailed. I don't know how users would coordinate enough bad reviews to make a difference. It could affect new vendors.
One question - my buyers stats are, IMHO, stellar. If I had a run in with a vendor that was mad about a 4/5 review and put me on the blacklist what would happen? Do other vendors view it as binary or do they look at buyer stats first then, if there is any question, look at the blacklist?
I don't like an opaque blacklist - it reminds me of the government's no-fly list. You can't know you're on it and there is no resolution process. I think a blacklist can make sense, but like transactions there should be some resolution process that all parties have a stake in. For example, I don't think there is a vendor I've done business with that wouldn't vouch for me.
There should be a reputation and privileges hierarchy that weights various buyers and vendors input. The technical site Stackoverflow does a good job of this - you have to earn the right to vote things up or down, to comment, to edit, etc. Over time the value of each person becomes obvious.
-
The buyer bond idea is excellent, this will do 2 other things, 1 encourage buyers to be more honest as they wouldnt want to loose their bond and 2 stop underage buyer signing up, something like $250-$300 buyer bond sounds fair.
At the moment I am not finding this new system any more helpful, the fact that feedback cant be edited is annoying, I waited around 2 weeks before I leave my feedback now and make sure I preview it a few times, not a major problem, but I did prefer the old way.
The only good thing is that old feedback can now be seen.
Buyer stats will help no end, it makes perfect sense to have buyer stats too.
My reputation is more important to me than a bond. I don't favor a bond even though I see that it could moderate the behavior of users without a reputation. The really hard part is to define exactly what bad behavior causes a user to lose their bond. The devil is in the details. And new users would likely be worried that the cards are stacked against them - vendors could scam then, the resolution process could be biased so they could collect the bond, and the only choice the user would have is to start a new account and pay another bond. The idea sounds good in practice but would probably have unintended consequences.
One problem with waiting weeks to leave feedback is that I have often lost track of just who's product is who's. Maybe that's just me.
I favor a feedback approach with two elements - one about product and the other about everything else. The product feedback is important to know whether the price is fair or not. The other rating should be based on stealth, communications, timeliness, and anything other than the product quality. This is important to know whether it is a vendor you want to do business with.
-
Hi DPR and friends.
Just my two cents worth here.
There seems to be a multitude of ideas here. Some of them quite brilliant, in fact.
I especially like the suggestions of NorCalKing. Well thought out, and logical.
Personally, I find the buyer stats quite sufficient to work with. In fact, I deal with almost everyone. I find a friendly and trusting tone goes a long way to getting those 5/5 rolling in. I don't discriminate against newbies, and allow them full escrow. Hell, if someone scams me out of a packet of weed - well, shame on him. Just as long as he gives me a 5/5 I'm ok lol..!
Anyway, I digress.
I just wanted to add my opinion here.
So far, I think the changes you have made are excellent.
Just one small thing. I think the default setting for finalizing an order should be 5/5 and not "I don't want to rate" for those who may be a little confused...
Also, I really feel feedback and comment shouldn't be anonymous.
Not for reasons of victimization, but rather for knowing who my most ardent supporters are.
Write up a great review for me, and you're bound to get that little bit of extra service next time round.
And that's not a bribe. I don't mention it on my profile page. But the next time you receive a package from me, it will be a generous helping of whatever you have ordered. Also, if someone HAS shot me down in flames, I would like to know who it is so I don't need to deal with him in future.
-
Consider the following scenario: Buyer leaves a 4/5, vendor says remove it or I'll give you a bad rating. To prevent this, it was suggested that vendors not see their rating until they have rated their buyer and vice versa. This sounds like a legitimate option, but I'd like to know if anyone sees a downside to it.
If I can't see their rating, I can't know how to rate them or if I want to do business with them again. If I do everything right, and they are not totally happy, I need to know that to have an informed opinion. Buyer ratings should be based on the transaction. Vendor ratings would need to include the buyer's actions at the end.
My business is still very slow and I think it is mostly because buyers cant see all the 5/5 transactions finalizing. Only being able to see feedback makes it appear I have much fewer transactions. Skipping over this issue would suck.
I also like the voluntary buyer bond idea. Buyers could get bonded to to help vendors trust them more, but buyers would not have to do so.
-
Hi DPR and friends.
Just my two cents worth here.
There seems to be a multitude of ideas here. Some of them quite brilliant, in fact.
I especially like the suggestions of NorCalKing. Well thought out, and logical.
Personally, I find the buyer stats quite sufficient to work with. In fact, I deal with almost everyone. I find a friendly and trusting tone goes a long way to getting those 5/5 rolling in. I don't discriminate against newbies, and allow them full escrow. Hell, if someone scams me out of a packet of weed - well, shame on him. Just as long as he gives me a 5/5 I'm ok lol..!
Anyway, I digress.
I just wanted to add my opinion here.
So far, I think the changes you have made are excellent.
Just one small thing. I think the default setting for finalizing an order should be 5/5 and not "I don't want to rate" for those who may be a little confused...
Also, I really feel feedback and comment shouldn't be anonymous.
Not for reasons of victimization, but rather for knowing who my most ardent supporters are.
Write up a great review for me, and you're bound to get that little bit of extra service next time round.
And that's not a bribe. I don't mention it on my profile page. But the next time you receive a package from me, it will be a generous helping of whatever you have ordered. Also, if someone HAS shot me down in flames, I would like to know who it is so I don't need to deal with him in future.
Totally agree with this. I like to bless those who leave a nice long review. And obviously don't want to deal with then customer who left 3/5 because it was only 2 grams overweight when last time it was 4 grams overweight.
-
Personally I think a buyer bond may be potentially worth working in. I paid $500 to be here, I got it back by proving myself so a nominal amount like 0.001BTC or an initial deposit that must be spent on SR perhaps of say 0.5BTC to create some sort of personal investment. Perhaps there could be 'bonded' buyers who could be denoted somehow, I know none of these are ideal but I'm trying to think of ways of making it easier for new buyers to get started and harder for sock puppeteering.
One of the main problems I have currently is that with the SR downtime/Tor botnet attacks people can't finalise, perhaps as has been suggested a 7 day auto-finalise period that doesn't penalise buyer stats could be offered in the delivery options? For example when I set the domestic delivery price there is a dropdown menu that gives you a couple of options(7 days, 17 days) but with no punishment for A-F on the 7 days since it can be due to downtime, legitimate personal stuff, etc. This also leaves the option of paying slightly extra for 17 days to finalise should the customer desire, for an extra few £/$ I wouldn't mind as much when people finalise late.
I just had an idea. It's not so much on the buyer feedback as it is on a way to reducing Auto-Finalizing. What if a system were implemented that if a buyer allowed an order to autofinalize, it penalized him by charging him say 0.2 BTC (or whatever). If the buyer had that much extra in his account, it would automatically be withdrawn. If not, a negative balance would be accumulated, and he would have to deposit at least that much before being allowed to buy anything else.
Furthermore, half of this charge could go to the vendor to make up for the delay, and the other half would be profit to DPR and the Silk Road.
Sorry to post off topic in this thread, but I wanted to mention that before I forgot it.
Thanks,
shroomin1
-
Have another concern we did no think about before - privacy.
Don wan other vendor to know who we do business with and what we buy. This go for vendor see recent order too.
-
i don't particularly care about a buyer feedback system. i'm definitely not enthused about having to do more clicking and waiting for pages to load any longer then i already have to, but i can see how other vendors that are dealing different products might want it.
correct me if i'm wrong, but there needs to be a way to see how many disputes with reships a user has initiated.
-
I say scratch it all entirely and we just rely on forum post counts and Karma, a truly flawless measure of character.
-
I say scratch it all entirely and we just rely on forum post counts and Karma, a truly flawless measure of character.
Was that Sarcasm? Karma is far from flawless. Seeing Forum stats as part of SR stats would be nice, but requiring people link a forum account to an SR account would not be good in many ways.
-
So far the new changes for me as a relatively young buyer have been very good.
It is a concern though recently a vendor that I was having a problem with messaged me to query if I had been leaving multiple messages on his vendor discussion. It is a concern that this vendor cannot see the identity of people posting (he would know I only left a message under my name then and no others) or if they are legitimate customers. The option of using an alias would seemingly be a not so good improvement also one should consider having the comments limited only to those who have/had a purchase number. Thank you though in advance for all improvements and considerations.
As for rating buyers! Yes hooray!
Needs to be done.
There is already enough negative information available on a buyer eg: auto finalize, refunds, black list etc
However a merit system for when customers have done the right action ie: honesty, admitting to fault of a non delivery, refusing a refund because the buyer was culpable, advising vendor of a double send mistake and offering to pay 50% etc etc Would be great. Surely it is important to encourage and/or reward buyer integrity and honesty.
The difficulty lies though that there are many bot type accounts that vendors use to buy from themselves and therefore these type of accounts could show unrealistic amounts of honesty/trust/legitimacy points etc and be used to further rip/slander competitor vendors.
perhaps a point system where each point is first submitted by one vendor and is not placed on record until another vendor from a different continent endorses/seconds the recommendation. (so the buyer has to do at least two different good deeds on two different continents before he/she gets recognition.
If you make these type of things hard to get, only then are they actually worth something.
Perhaps developing the buyer profile, so that vendors may add comments (using a order/purchase number or similar) They should not have to have their vendor name visible just their continent the purchase weight score, adding to the appropriate point card slot and a comment.
The buyer should be able to edit/delete such comments if they so wish.
Just recently I had a no show from a regular vendor who was willing to discuss/offer reship/refund. We did not get into specifics of how much or when because I as the buyer took responsibility for the no-show. I could have just as easily shut my mouth. Firstly I think it is of utmost importance to maintain honesty with my sellers but apart from that it would be good if that type of behavior/ethics could be recorded in order to benefit any doubt I might encounter from another vendor later on down the road. Lets face it a lot of buyers will just scream 'refund me' full knowing it could probably be on their end.
Anyway, thank you to all the big people talking to the little people and working on changes to the community.
Sorry to waffle on so much but I could not help myself with such an important implementation.
-
The "buyer black lists", though opaque, are at least available as suggestions to be discussed between vendors. Buyer reviews would serve as permanent marks that are not up for discussions of evidence.
So, if this was done, there would need to be some very good assurance that false accusations and hasty incriminations would have as little consequence as they do when they are placed against vendors.
We don't discuss anything about buyers on the blacklist. They get put on and stay there. It is a long list.
When a buyer is added to a blacklist, there is usually a written explanation as to what they did to get on the list.
Often there is several vendors who all report the same username. People aren't just added to the blacklist for no reason.
There is always a reason.
-
Despite being a vendor my self, I see too much room for abuse if vendors are allowed to review buyers. This is exactly how eBay used to operate, which lead to all sorts of problems with vendor/buyer waring/threatening via feedback. It got messy. eBay in its current state no longer allows vendor to review their buyers.
As DPR mentioned, we already have access to in depth buyer stats.
An equivalent of the blacklist found in the vendor roundtable would be appreciated though. If individual vendors have an option to blacklist buyers, and if this information was accessible to other vendors, that would be useful. This would be displayed as a "buyer has been blacklisted x times".
Perhaps as an extension to this, it may be worth having feature where other vendors could see which vendors blacklisted a buyer, thereby allowing vendors to make an informed choice on how weighty such a block was. If a new unheard-of vendor blocked someone, I may still trade with that buyer, but if say Symbiosis blocked a buyer, I would feel that was much more serious.
My 2 cents/pence.
ST
-
As usual, great points have been raised. At this point, I think it is too soon to make more changes to the system. We need more time for everyone to get used to the changes that have already been made.
-
TL;DR: Fuck the vendors for now. No buyer ratings. Let the scamming continue!
-
As usual, great points have been raised. At this point, I think it is too soon to make more changes to the system. We need more time for everyone to get used to the changes that have already been made.
Sad news. I can see postponing the buyer rating can-of-worms. Fixing the feedback system, however, seems to need emergency action in my opinion.
-
I just want to give thanks here to the vendors that deal with buyers like myself with zero stats. We got to start somewhere. I appreciate the trust and honesty.
So thanks to xinhai, caerus, tweetb, lucymcgee.. ;) And those I haven't ordered from yet but spend allot of time reading their listings and reviews (see you soon too!).
-
THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU..!
For putting buyer feedback and usernames back into recent orders...
I've scanned the list and can't find any buyers to blackmail or extort at present, but I do see some of my regulars (and some new users) comments on a new listing I had up - and I now have a good indication of whether or not to list it again.
It's good to know that one's opinion can be aired, and that it can actually make a difference on an underground site that has more integrity in one little pinky, than entire governments have in their whole body.
Anyway - back to work now.
Just popped in to say thanks.
-
I think we should look at reducing the time for Auto Finalize to kick-in faster when it's a domestic order.
I'm not a vendor, but I would be pissed if I was, and having to wait 17 days for a domestic order to finalize.
Perhaps 7 days for domestic and 17 for international?
-
Despite being a vendor my self, I see too much room for abuse if vendors are allowed to review buyers. This is exactly how eBay used to operate, which lead to all sorts of problems with vendor/buyer waring/threatening via feedback. It got messy. eBay in its current state no longer allows vendor to review their buyers.
As DPR mentioned, we already have access to in depth buyer stats.
The feel that people we work with have is like ^^^^^^^^.
-
THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU..!
For putting buyer feedback and usernames back into recent orders...
I've scanned the list and can't find any buyers to blackmail or extort at present, but I do see some of my regulars (and some new users) comments on a new listing I had up - and I now have a good indication of whether or not to list it again.
It's good to know that one's opinion can be aired, and that it can actually make a difference on an underground site that has more integrity in one little pinky, than entire governments have in their whole body.
Anyway - back to work now.
Just popped in to say thanks.
Yes but is there any way of seeing old orders?
I had a very regular customer who I told I would contact when I have more weed in and that time has come and I would like to contact t hem but cannot remember their username.
And messages are deleted from that far ago too.
That was my best customer and I would really like to find them again.
-
I think we should look at reducing the time for Auto Finalize to kick-in faster when it's a domestic order.
I'm not a vendor, but I would be pissed if I was, and having to wait 17 days for a domestic order to finalize.
Perhaps 7 days for domestic and 17 for international?
YES YES YES YES YES!
I have been saying this for months.
DPR please implement a shorter auto-finalise period.
If there is any problems it can be extended easily.
I have had a lot of orders auto-finalise. 95% of my orders arrive within 4 days and waiting 17 days is unfair.
It is t he buyers responsibility to finalise, but is still unfair having to wait 17 days for payment.
7 days would be great. If it needs to be extended, it is just a couple of mouse clicks.
-
I say scratch it all entirely and we just rely on forum post counts and Karma, a truly flawless measure of character.
Was that Sarcasm? Karma is far from flawless. Seeing Forum stats as part of SR stats would be nice, but requiring people link a forum account to an SR account would not be good in many ways.
It absolutely was a joke
-
A buyer bond is stupid. It will just prevent people from joining. It would also fuck somebody if they got blacklisted for something dumb and wanted to make a new account.
What about somebody who is just coming to look? Check the place out and see if they want to participate. It keeps them out too.
The market can only grow when we add more buyers and sellers.
Its a lot easier for a vendor to do a mass scam. Therefore, the vendor bond.
How about I offer all the vendors a little bit of insurance. You pay me a certain number of BTC every month to be insured against buyer scams up to 1000 dollars in value. If you can prove you were scammed according to my actuaries, I'll pay out the value of the scam. I think this is the best way for all of us to solve these problems....
-
the system should be like ebay where both the buyer and the vender can leave reviews on each transaction. the numbers that appear next to a buyers' name when they place an order should have their total number of purchases, their refund percentage, their autonfinalize number AND the number of reviews they've left. For example, 30/3%/5/30 means 30 purchases, 3% were refunded (or 1 purchase) 5 autofinalized (which means on 5 of those 30 transactions, the buyer didn't pay when their package arrived, but instead ran the clock out and left those vendors waiting 17 days before the system forced them to pay) and every purchase got a review.
Each individual number should link to a corresponding page in their buyer profile or a single page that lists condensed abstracts of each purchase - each abstract has 4 columns: the listing title that links to a sanitized transaction page, the ranking left by the buyer, the review left by the buyer, and the review left by the vendor.
It would look like this:
1/4 oz Sour Diesel - Medical / 5/5 / Smooth as silk! I LOVE THESE BUDZZZ, YO! / Great customer. Finalized quickly after receiving product.
Don't get into coming up with an algorithm that "rates" buyers! Thats Pandoras box with very little upside for vendors. Instead, simply give us the tools to look up the relevant details on the customer to figure out for ourselves whether we want to do business with them. I don't want some algorithm telling me who i should do business with or rating my potential customers - i'll make that decision for myself. There is no such thing as too much information, but there is something called too much automation
-
I am convinced that a lot of Vendors have Sock-Puppets to artificially inflate their ratings.
Given that doing this as a Buyer is cost-prohibitive -I also believe that these very same Vendors are going to give Buyers bad ratings as retaliation.
So it seems that SR is implementing a system that benefits the Sellers over the Buyers.
CAVEAT EMPTOR
-
So it seems that SR is implementing a system that benefits the Sellers over the Buyers.
But how does giving more power to Vendors correct this?
A Vendor willing to create an army of Sock Puppets is also a Vendor willing to give 1/5 Customer review if they don't "play ball".
-
So it seems that SR is implementing a system that benefits the Sellers over the Buyers.
But how does giving more power to Vendors correct this?
A Vendor willing to create an army of Sock Puppets is also a Vendor willing to give 1/5 Customer review if they don't "play ball".
It doesn't.
-
I think we should look at reducing the time for Auto Finalize to kick-in faster when it's a domestic order.
I'm not a vendor, but I would be pissed if I was, and having to wait 17 days for a domestic order to finalize.
Perhaps 7 days for domestic and 17 for international?
Brilliant idea!!! I'm all for it!
8)
-
As a quick note, some of you have said that vendors wouldn't take the time to rate hundreds of buyers. We could default the rating to "yes, would do business again" and then have a batch process in one click, so all they would need to do is change the bad buyers to "no" and click "rate all". So that's not an issue.
Thanks again for the discussion. Let's focus now on the points I've just raised and move the conversation forward.
Hi DPR 8)
- Do we get to vote on this straightforward proposal? And when?
-
I think we should look at reducing the time for Auto Finalize to kick-in faster when it's a domestic order.
I'm not a vendor, but I would be pissed if I was, and having to wait 17 days for a domestic order to finalize.
Perhaps 7 days for domestic and 17 for international?
Brilliant idea!!! I'm all for it!
8)
7 days is ridiculously short. If not shipped express, and sometimes even if, it is normal for a letter or package to take 7-8 days to get from one coast of Canada/USA to the other.
-
I think we should look at reducing the time for Auto Finalize to kick-in faster when it's a domestic order.
I'm not a vendor, but I would be pissed if I was, and having to wait 17 days for a domestic order to finalize.
Perhaps 7 days for domestic and 17 for international?
Brilliant idea!!! I'm all for it!
8)
7 days is ridiculously short. If not shipped express, and sometimes even if, it is normal for a letter or package to take 7-8 days to get from one coast of Canada/USA to the other.
Agreed. I think if it had to change, 10 days would be good.
-
I think we should look at reducing the time for Auto Finalize to kick-in faster when it's a domestic order.
I'm not a vendor, but I would be pissed if I was, and having to wait 17 days for a domestic order to finalize.
Perhaps 7 days for domestic and 17 for international?
Brilliant idea!!! I'm all for it!
8)
7 days is ridiculously short. If not shipped express, and sometimes even if, it is normal for a letter or package to take 7-8 days to get from one coast of Canada/USA to the other.
Agreed. I think if it had to change, 10 days would be good.
It can very easily be extended if necessary.
95% of my orders arrive within 2 days but I still get lots which auto-finalise.
-
I will say yes to the updates. As a vendor I can see how this could be a problem if a buyer left a not so stellar feedback. I would suggest that any vendors's feedback towards buyers should be only a couple check mark boxes to fill in.
1. Definitely a scammer with proof- (Retain your tracking numbers vendors!)
2. Finalized shortly after package arrived. (especially for us vendors that have tracking to be able to know these things.
3. Did not finalize in a timely manner
4. Auto-finalized - Automatic check if buyer auto finalizes/ also not allowing that buyer to leave feedback and receive an auto autofinalized review mark. (Us vendors should not be able to control this one)
5. Possible scammer (this box would have to be weighted lightly against a buyers rep depending on credibility/ rating/ time spent as a vendor.
6. Awesome buyer and would recommend to any type of vendor
Anyone please feel free to comment on my ideas/ add some ideas for yourself
I do not believe a written feedback is necessary as long as we have many of these check mark box options to choose from. That will also keep any blackmail type issues in check a bit
--CSF
-
I'm for buyer feedback. I think it would bring buyers and vendors onto a little more of a level ground. I think it will give buyers a little more to think about before so hastily giving vendors feedback that they cannot retract.
Thanks DPR,
TFG
-
From everything I've read. I think that buyer ratings would be great! If and only if done in a way the vendors and buyers are happy, and it's fair for both sides. I think keeping it short and easy for the vendors is key, and then giving the option to leave a review if the vendor wants to. This way if they have a bad transaction, they can leave a review and explain a little bit about what went wrong; which would also give other vendors an idea of weather or not they would like to deal with this buyer or not. I've read a few posts that recommended something like 6 or 7 yes/no questions the vendors could go through when they rate the buyer; this format would keep it short and quick so they can continue to get orders out fast.
Another idea I've considered is giving the buyer one freebie, or something along those lines. That would still not let scammers abuse it, but give legit people a chance if they mess up one of there first transactions. Like maybe have specific easy things people have to start with for there first transaction to get the feel of what a successful transaction should be like. This is crucial because it would be terrible if a Vendor-to-Buyer rating system caused one bad rating to make it difficult for new users to be accepted by other Vendors. Eventually this could cause them to stop using the site altogether, which I'm sure the future of the Road would be somewhat weakened by (or at least no chance of strengthening it). Thx for your time!
-
To address number 2, it's not a level playing field when older vendors have months or years of all 5/5 ratings and newer vendors are getting a 4/5 for perfect service. As we all know, an older vendor with thousands of 5/5 from before this new system can receive many 1/5s without even losing their perfect 5.0/5
That is not level at all.
I am all for buyer feedback. A system much like vendor feedback where vendors can comment on transactions using an alias and give a rating.
Also addressing #2) Wouldn't that have the same unfair effect on buyers that you just mentioned about sellers? Maybe using an algorithm that takes membership time into account would be useful. As a responsible buyer I have no problem with rating buyers, but there's always the chance of throwing a scam victim under the bus when you rate buyers.
To make sure my point is understood correctly, let's say an honest buyer who's new gets scammed and has to get refunds twice during his first ten purchases (unlikely I know, but possible). It would take many, many smooth transactions to sweep those mishaps under the rug even though the buyer is an honest guy.
I've never had to go to resolution for a refund, so I've got a question about it. If a dispute goes to resolution and it turns out that there is incontrovertible evidence that the vendor is in fact a scammer, and the buyer gets a refund; does it still count against the buyers stats? Is there any discretion in cases like that as to whether or not show a refund on the buyer's account? Or is it viewed as a refund is a refund is a refund?
-
Do vendors really have the time to "create an army of sock puppets" to boost their ratings..?
Could that even work..? Surely it would be less work to just provide a decent service as opposed to creating fake buyers. When I'm driving, and I see the ever present plethora of beggars at traffic lights, I just think to myself - wouldn't it be easier just to get a job..? For Christ's sake, get a broom and sweep. Come sweep my driveway. I'll pay you - and feed you.
IMHO - I think ratings for vendors should be Good, Average or Bad.
I'm not not sure about rating buyers. Let their stats speak for themselves.
When I buy from a vendor, all I want to know is - does he deliver, and is his product good...
I'm not really interested in some amateur's opinion on how he thinks a seasoned vendor should pack the product or that the vendor didn't really want to get into some type of pen-pal relationship with him, so he gave him a 3 for lack of communication.
-
Do vendors really have the time to "create an army of sock puppets" to boost their ratings..?
Could that even work..? Surely it would be less work to just provide a decent service as opposed to creating fake buyers.....
I think it is mostly useful for new vendors (or old vendor accounts recently aquired?) who don't plan to be around for long after some quick FE scamming. It only takes a few puppets to make the feedback section look like you have happy recent customers and product arriving to customers. Unless I just have not seen how, buyers can not see actual transaction volume anymore. All they can see is feedback from buyers that choose to leave feedback.
-
The sockpuppet gambit costs, though. Every phoney trade whereby you churn BTC comes with a 10% commission pricetag. There are, I reckon, some very specific instances where it could be effective. As a general strategy to pump up your ratings - particularly if you're moving some volume anyway - I reckon it'd cost more than you'd gain.
It'd probably be more effective when used by malevolent vendors against competition they fear. A turd in a punchbowl vs an especially fawning review to add to the many legitimate 5 star ratings.
-
I am for rating buyers! I am new to SR and am still figuring things out with small buys. i am hoping once i have a few successful transactions i would be able to get a good rating which would ensure more trust in me from the sellers side. at the moment sellers will potentially think i am a scammer, as i am new.
I think its a good idea!
-
bad idea. vendors already have too much power and can basically selectively scam whenever they please. There is no reason for buyers to be reviewed... the stats on auto-finalize and amount spent are sufficient.
-
bad idea. vendors already have too much power and can basically selectively scam whenever they please. There is no reason for buyers to be reviewed... the stats on auto-finalize and amount spent are sufficient.
Spoken like a true scammer.
-
The sockpuppet gambit costs, though. Every phoney trade whereby you churn BTC comes with a 10% commission pricetag.
You must have missed reading my explanation on how to do it for pennies. You make stealth listings for super cheap (0.0001 btc). Sell to your Puppets. Raise the price to normal and unStealth. Puppet feedback does not show what price they paid.
-
The sockpuppet gambit costs, though. Every phoney trade whereby you churn BTC comes with a 10% commission pricetag.
You must have missed reading my explanation on how to do it for pennies. You make stealth listings for super cheap (0.0001 btc). Sell to your Puppets. Raise the price to normal and unStealth. Puppet feedback does not show what price they paid.
Feedback does show a rounded price that was paid for each listing... That method is also very easy for administration to catch.
-
Allowing for a written buyer review would be nice. Say something goes wrong on a big buy and you've been here for over a year and now your refund % is 60%. Nobody will do business with a 60% refunded account.
But that same account, with a written review from the vendor saying how it was not the buyer's fault, would no longer need to be tossed for a fresh day old account.
-
Allowing for a written buyer review would be nice. Say something goes wrong on a big buy and you've been here for over a year and now your refund % is 60%. Nobody will do business with a 60% refunded account.
But that same account, with a written review from the vendor saying how it was not the buyer's fault, would no longer need to be tossed for a fresh day old account.
Valid point. Something like a rebuttal from a restaurant owner on a yelp review would be useful too against an attempted scammer threatening a low feedback.
-
Allowing for a written buyer review would be nice. Say something goes wrong on a big buy and you've been here for over a year and now your refund % is 60%. Nobody will do business with a 60% refunded account.
But that same account, with a written review from the vendor saying how it was not the buyer's fault, would no longer need to be tossed for a fresh day old account.
Valid point. Something like a rebuttal from a restaurant owner on a yelp review would be useful too against an attempted scammer threatening a low feedback.
But do we have the technology?
-
Well.......I am ready for this feature.........I have so many cool....excellent customers .....i would be happy to write very positive reviews for.... :)
and on the other hand......had a customer.....that i would love to write a review on as of today .......that would not be so glowing..........I am so looking forward to this new feature.
Can we expect it TOMORROW??????
-
i think alot of good buyers are scared to leave bad feedback of shitty vendors for fear of being blacklisted and not able to buy. in the past few months the H vendors have gone down hill quickly, ,they all take a LONG time to process and ship orders. where as 3-5 days was the norm before now its 7+. Some of us are relying on things to arrive in a decent amount of time. i check my mail EVERY DAY, and when i receive something i finalize ASAP. i try to plan ahead but damn its just taking too long once i order to get it, it a shame to see something that used to be awesome in everyway to turn to shit so quick. If i left honest feedback for everything i have received (and are still waiting on) it wouldnt be good feedback. Does it really take more then a week to mail out and ship something( that im paying the highest/fastest shipping prices for)?
-
Hi Folks,
Really appreciate the work you guys are doing ! We don't think that most people would even know where to start on projects of this magnitude.
In a restrictive world, you break down the barriers.
Keep up the good work, and long live Silk Road.
Namaste
MachineElves
-
i think alot of good buyers are scared to leave bad feedback of shitty vendors for fear of being blacklisted and not able to buy. in the past few months the H vendors have gone down hill quickly, ,they all take a LONG time to process and ship orders. where as 3-5 days was the norm before now its 7+. Some of us are relying on things to arrive in a decent amount of time. i check my mail EVERY DAY, and when i receive something i finalize ASAP. i try to plan ahead but damn its just taking too long once i order to get it, it a shame to see something that used to be awesome in everyway to turn to shit so quick. If i left honest feedback for everything i have received (and are still waiting on) it wouldnt be good feedback. Does it really take more then a week to mail out and ship something( that im paying the highest/fastest shipping prices for)?
I agree with a lot of ^. First it's true many vendors who used to be fast and dependable seem to be slow and non-responsive lately and I think it has to do with buyers not fairly rating vendors. One reviewer got underweight product, wasn't processed for 5 days, and quality was lacking and he gave the vendor a 5.0. That is more common than not. I have about $10,000 in buys and I will buy from someone with less than a 5.0 if the reviews indicate that the vendor got a poorer than deserved number weighed against the review. The reviews, for me, carry more weight than the number. If I had to choose vendors just on numbers and didn't see the reviews I would end up with a lot of bad buys. I have gotten terrible service from supposedly 5.0 vendors. It takes some more time to do the research but in the end it's worth it.
Secondly I think vendors should be able to rate buyers but not with a number rating, just a comment block like "Buyer always finalizes fast, responds to messages, always follows the guide, Great buyer" like they have on eBay. Numbers are meaningless by themselves, what matters is how did everyone (buyer or vendor) do when weighed against a standard? I gave a 3.0 to a vendor recently because they took 4+ days to process an order. SR says 4 days is the standard, the rating system says 5.0 is outstanding, therefore vendor didn't meet standard and cannot be considered outstanding. Everyone has to be willing to put in the work and look at the steps in the transaction and the results and then make an objective decision as to how the buyer/vendor performed. If a buyer consistently tries extorting vendors or denies receiving orders to get re-ships or refunds then they should be flagged somehow. But vendors should be able to look at buyers the same way buyers look at vendors. My stats tell part of the story, the rest could be told by my vendors telling other vendors "Buyer always finalizes within hours of receipt. Responds to messages, always polite and easy to deal with. Highly recommend"
1 month 3 months 1 year all time
total transactions 4 33 65 65
total spent $443.09 $3,607.90 $9,571.30 $9,571.30
total vendors 4 22 37 37
refund rate 0% 0% 0% 0%
auto-finalize rate 0% 0% 0% 0%
-
I suggest to put a DISTINCTIVE MARK on SR accounts of BLACKLISTED BUYERS... which allow vendors to recognize them and be wary about them.
Because, for now, it is too complicated (a waste of time) to search systematically inside the blacklists the nickname of each potential buyer!
Please, DPR, do that for us! Too much buyers are in bad faith and can with impunity abuse of the current very liberal system...
-
As a buyer, I cannot be held responsible for how "quickly I finalize." Just like a I can't hold a vendor responsible if the mail happens to take 8 days for a package to get to me.
That is just an unfair measure of my trustworthiness as a buyer. For the vendor, if a package was taking that long, I would contact them and find out the issue. Is a vendor supposed to message me and see why it has taken me so long to finalize?
A buyer rating system has to address the problem at hand, and that is buyers who scam vendors. Anything else that goes into it is superfluous. Like judging my account as bad when I have 17 successful transactions, no refunds, but two vendors said I took awhile to finalize because their packages were delayed in the mail or I had a stupidly busy couple of days.
-
When will this feature be up?
I would like to report a scammer from the Silk Road claiming to be a reputable user from the forums.
In fact i have proof, and i would like to have his account suspended before he reaches out to other new and innocent vendors.
Love and peace,
MR LUCY