Silk Road forums

Discussion => Silk Road discussion => Topic started by: Xanthis on August 24, 2013, 02:04 am

Title: Feedback Scaling (Feature Request)
Post by: Xanthis on August 24, 2013, 02:04 am
I have a suggestion for the feedback system, nothing major, but immensely helpful to the whole process.

I understand the purpose of the 1-5 scale, and that's it's supposed to be a largely subjective measurement of how you felt your overall service was, but do you think that you could include a little annotation next to each providing some context as to what each number *should* represent?

If there could be some objective measurements in there as well, everyone; buyer, vendor, lurkers, would be on the same page, or at least the same damn chapter as to what the discrepancy between a 4 out of 5 service, a 5 out of 5, and 2 out of 5 is.

Something like:

· 5 (Package arrived, either on-time or early, with no mishaps, core transaction went smoothly. If in the event of a refund or resolution, both parties reached a mutual agreement.)

· 4 (Mutually beneficial transaction, albeit somewhat confusing happenstances/communication, or arrival was a day or two late, or stealth was a minor concern upon reception.)

· 3 (A moderate issue with a significant portion of the dealing. Either the product was advertised incorrectly, a refund was demanded, communication was poor, or there was just a mix-up, but at the end of the day you don't blame the vendor malicious intent.)

· 2 (A major mistake or blunder took place. Maybe you finalized early, there was a lack of communication, your package didn't arrive, or if it did it was damaged, and/or had to sign for it despite being led to believe otherwise, and you feel uncomfortable doing business with said vendor again.)

· 1 (There is no segment in the process in which you were satisfied. You either believe it was an outright scam, or the vendor was wholly uncooperative. Either way, you're adamant in reducing business with said person in any way possible, and would not recommend or suggest said vendor to others.)

Worded or paraphrased to what you will, obviously. This is just a hastily written guideline/template with which you can base more detailed descriptions around, and with my lack of patience and incredulously severe ineptitude of articulation, I'm sure I björked a thing or two somewhere down the line.

Hopefully it's taken into consideration.

Feel free to correct me, criticize, or otherwise berate me for an inutile feature request. And if you support it, well, then. Yay.
Title: Re: Feedback Scaling (Feature Request)
Post by: Dread Pirate Roberts on August 24, 2013, 03:08 am
something very similar got put into the development environment today.
Title: Re: Feedback Scaling (Feature Request)
Post by: Romero on August 25, 2013, 04:12 am
The only issue I see: even though you're adding words, the options are the same as they've always been (1-5). In Mixed Martial Arts, there's a problem very similar to this: rounds are scored from 1-10; if you win the round you get 10 & if you lose, your score is between 1-9. The problem is: no one ever receives anything lower than an 8, and it's extremely, extremely rare for someone to get an 8. Even though there are technically ten options, in reality there are only two. The most popular proposal to add more options is to go to a half-point system where you have 8.5 and 9.5 (or 3.5 & 4.5 for SR).

I'm sure many people have proposed this change for SR feedback and the reason why it makes sense is because you're actually adding more options. Since you're not changing the scale to 1-10, you'd be improving the past system rather than implementing a new one. If you want people to leave something other than a 5, I absolutely think you'll need to add more options on top of the descriptions that you've proposed. But if DPR has already been working on your suggestion, I guess we'll soon find out if it'll be enough to get people to leave something other than a 5.
Title: Re: Feedback Scaling (Feature Request)
Post by: Trappy on August 25, 2013, 06:17 am
Marking off a full point for 1-2 days late? I suppose I understand if you pay a ridiculous express shipping fee, but otherwise that is too harsh. I would mark a point off for using potentially risky stealthing techniques, such as exclusively food grade vac seals on Marijuana or MDMA products, that still managed to show up.

Title: Re: Feedback Scaling (Feature Request)
Post by: Kiwikiikii on August 25, 2013, 06:33 am
Its been suggested many times in these "discussion/feedback" threads to have separate feedback rankings for "communication, stealth, speed, and product", but it doesnt appear DPR wants to make the ratings system clearer. Having a rough description for the current catch-all star system does not alleivate case circumstance or provide a clear picture (eg. a vendor had shitty communication but delivered promptly when ordered, or a vendor was slow to ship but the product and stealth was superb). For these scenarios we rely on reading line by line vague and incomplete responses which are sometimes not reflective of the score: "5/5 Vendor scammed me i never received my package, did not respond when asked about it but going to give a good score anyways else ill be blacklisted."

tdlr: if we had multiple categories then it would take the weight off the buyer and allow them to provide more accurate feedback.