Okay, so this brings up a good question. If SR does not support FE, why are vendors w/ 35+ transactions 'allowed' to ask for it? Seems contradictory.
I feel that this just gets put on the buyer every time with a "if you just don't FE, you won't get scammed" ...
All vendors previous to this policy being brought in were permitted to ask buyers to FE. In an attempt to fight scams, DPR decided to implement a 35+ transactions, 1 month+ vending period limit before that restriction was removed. Keep in mind that this is, first and foremost, a free-market marketplace - I would imagine DPR did not want to put such a restriction in place as it goes against free-market ideals, but did so anyway to protect buyers from unscrupulous scammers starting accounts and scamming from the get-go. Other factors that do not infringe on the free-market were also brought in, such as buyer feedback weight determining a vendor's feeback, and the vendor bond.
Secondly, it IS on the buyer. They have a choice to make whether to FE or not. Personal responsibility is required if one wishes to partake in transactions in an unregulated free market. If people lack personal responsibility, and get scammed as a result of literally giving their money away, then that is their own failing. Finalising Early is akin to approaching a complete stranger on the street and asking them for a product, giving your money to them after they promise to go around the corner and come back in a couple of minutes with the product you wanted, and actually expecting them to deliver on that promise.
It all boils down to personal responsibility - that is the crux of the matter. If people did not FE then they could not get scammed by FE'ing!
If I have an order in with a vendor who is banned 2 days later, but SR makes me wait 8 more days before I can get my order into resolution to get my money back, then you might as well be endorsing the scam. That's how it feels on the buyer end, especially when the default response is always so simply, "Don't FE, problem solved." -Correct me if I'm wrong, this is essentially what you told another user in this thread, correct?
I have explained the reason for this in one of my previous posts above:
http://dkn255hz262ypmii.onion/index.php?topic=159668.msg1143856#msg1143856
I agree, Festivalia, but it takes time to complete an investigation - accounts are suspended whilst this takes place - and the potential for a situation to arise whereby a vendor is suspended, money is returned to buyers, but then the vendor is found not to have broken any rules and it was all a result of something out of their control (postal issues etc.), leaving them with no product and no money is simply too high, and that can't be allowed to occur. The decision to suspend a vendor's account is not taken lightly and for that decision to be made it requires the strongest indications that something that violates the terms of the Seller contract is indeed occurring.
And no, I have never simply stated "Don't FE, problem solved", nor anything along those lines. If a buyer complains that they have been scammed by FE'ing, I direct them to the SR Wiki Buyer's Guide and F.A.Q. sections where it tells them that it is recommended that they stay within the safety of escrow until they receive their product and are 100% satisfied with it. I also advise them never to FE for any vendor, regardless of that vendors feedback or reputation.
Imo... don't tell vendors they can ask for FE. Problem solved.
This would involve regulating the market, and we cannot abandon the principles of the free-market simply because some buyers choose not to exercise restraint, do their due diligence nor accept the fact that they have to employ a modicum of personal responsibility when it comes to Finalising an order before they receive it. The very meaning of the word 'Finalised' means that something is complete - if the deal has not been completed, then there is no reason to finalise.
Or if there were some kind of Tracking/DCN field in the Orders menu, where a vendor could input DCN/Tracking for pending/in-transit orders ahead of time, enabling the Finalization button -leaving it up to the buyer to Finalize Early in THAT circumstance, knowing 'something' is on the way. This would also likely eliminate a lot of plain old bad vendors...
A scamming vendor could simply send out an empty package (or perhaps even send a small quantity when the buyer has paid for a large quantity) and provide the DCN / Tracking number in the field provided. The buyer would then likely Finalise (the same people that FE already, but likely more as well) once they see that the vendor has provided that - obviously presuming that all is well and their product is on its way. This would actually greatly increase the amount of time that a vendor could remain scamming as they could do this whilst the empty packages are in the mail, then employ delay tactics to continue pulling off the same scam for much longer than they are able to get away with it now.
If such a feature had already been employed here and was used in the manner I have described above (as it most certainly would be by many scammers), you would be calling for its removal with even more vigour than you are calling for its inclusion.
At the end of the day, it is completely up to the buyer to decide whether they will finalise their order or not. Nobody but the person themselves can be held responsible for their own actions.
Libertas
Show Posts
