New Feedback Feature - Detailed Ratings

[aweeks]

i'm not a fan of it either. but oh well what do you do? i'm sure it will grow on me...just like everyone else says, i feel it will cause for trouble with some members.
i'll also deal with it...just because i love this site!

[TannieS]

I think if there were enough people that didn't like the feature, perhaps it would not be used???

I dunno, like the previous few posters have stated; it's just a cause for concern on how people will "grade" each other. Once again, someone shipped something perfectly, but only received a 4. That doesn't make sense at all.

I say get rid of the perfect grading system, but leave in the other newly added feature of when people sent. At least if there is a fight between someone saying they sent the card, there is somewhat proof if they did or not.

Except... once again... all my "todays" say "yesterday" and I'm on the right time.........

[underdog]

Love the idea. Because I don't have the magic number of 20, I have to send first. I just waited 6 weeks for something I'll never look at again, (went in a set). "Oh, I forgot...." Hopefully, this will jog some memories.

Chris

[Lea DeFoote]

I like this feature in theory, but I can already see that, like the ones on eBay, it is not going to provide much useful information. In order for this feature to be useful, the standard feedback should be Positive with detailed ratings of 3's. People are already complaining about getting 4's. According to the description, 4 means Good. Since when is Good a bad thing? If everybody expects to get all 5's, just like on eBay, we're going to be stuck trying to glean information from ratings of 4.7, 4.8 and 4.9, and we're right back to feedback effectively being either positive, neutral or negative. If everyone's detailed ratings are over 4, that doesn't tell me anything different than just seeing the positives.

In order for this feature to be useful, 1, 2, and 3 have to be acceptable responses along with a positive rating. For example, let's say that someone I worked out a trade with has all positive feedback, but a timeliness rating of 3 and communication rating of 2. This would tell me that this person has always made good on their deals, but I shouldn't be necessarily concerned if my cards haven't arrived yet after a week and a half and I haven't gotten any PM's from them either. Likewise, in order to be useful, 5's should be reserved for exceptional service. A 5 in communication should be for someone who responds to PM's within a few hours. A 5 in timeliness should be for someone who sends out the same day (or first thing the next morning after) the deal is confirmed. These are not expected standards, they are exceptional. You know, like the description of a 5 rating - Excellent.

If members are going to complain about receiving 3's and 4's, and think that someone with all positives and a detailed rating in the 3's is a bad trader, then I think we should just do away with this feature all together. If 5 is the minimum acceptable rating, then it would be more effective to add a feature to the trade manager that requires the exact packaging to be used and the date to be mailed be specified ahead of time. As always, communication is key. The way I see this feature being used, it does not seem to be an effective means of communicating good information.

-Tom

[angel0430]

I say too much details on a trade are not good because some people are not honest or can take advantage of that to screw you over. The difference between here and ebay is that in here you are able to contatc that person anytime, on ebay they just can ignore you.

I have make some deals with gladdy and I know he is one of the best ones out there and see what happened to him. Some people are dishonest.

[angel0430]

I like this feature in theory, but I can already see that, like the ones on eBay, it is not going to provide much useful information. In order for this feature to be useful, the standard feedback should be Positive with detailed ratings of 3's. People are already complaining about getting 4's. According to the description, 4 means Good. Since when is Good a bad thing? If everybody expects to get all 5's, just like on eBay, we're going to be stuck trying to glean information from ratings of 4.7, 4.8 and 4.9, and we're right back to feedback effectively being either positive, neutral or negative. If everyone's detailed ratings are over 4, that doesn't tell me anything different than just seeing the positives.

In order for this feature to be useful, 1, 2, and 3 have to be acceptable responses along with a positive rating. For example, let's say that someone I worked out a trade with has all positive feedback, but a timeliness rating of 3 and communication rating of 2. This would tell me that this person has always made good on their deals, but I shouldn't be necessarily concerned if my cards haven't arrived yet after a week and a half and I haven't gotten any PM's from them either. Likewise, in order to be useful, 5's should be reserved for exceptional service. A 5 in communication should be for someone who responds to PM's within a few hours. A 5 in timeliness should be for someone who sends out the same day (or first thing the next morning after) the deal is confirmed. These are not expected standards, they are exceptional. You know, like the description of a 5 rating - Excellent.

If members are going to complain about receiving 3's and 4's, and think that someone with all positives and a detailed rating in the 3's is a bad trader, then I think we should just do away with this feature all together. If 5 is the minimum acceptable rating, then it would be more effective to add a feature to the trade manager that requires the exact packaging to be used and the date to be mailed be specified ahead of time. As always, communication is key. The way I see this feature being used, it does not seem to be an effective means of communicating good information.

-Tom

Something like that is waht I meant went I posted. Thanks

[DirtyHarry]

I think if there were enough people that didn't like the feature, perhaps it would not be used???

I dunno, like the previous few posters have stated; it's just a cause for concern on how people will "grade" each other. Once again, someone shipped something perfectly, but only received a 4. That doesn't make sense at all.

I say get rid of the perfect grading system, but leave in the other newly added feature of when people sent. At least if there is a fight between someone saying they sent the card, there is somewhat proof if they did or not.

Except... once again... all my "todays" say "yesterday" and I'm on the right time.........

No problem, checking this.

[DirtyHarry]

I think if there were enough people that didn't like the feature, perhaps it would not be used???

I dunno, like the previous few posters have stated; it's just a cause for concern on how people will "grade" each other. Once again, someone shipped something perfectly, but only received a 4. That doesn't make sense at all.

I say get rid of the perfect grading system, but leave in the other newly added feature of when people sent. At least if there is a fight between someone saying they sent the card, there is somewhat proof if they did or not.

Except... once again... all my "todays" say "yesterday" and I'm on the right time.........

Hello,

I entered duplicating your account, and today's trades are effectively shown as "Today". Where are you seeing the Yesterday date? What time to do you see at the bottom of the forums? Does it match your local time?

Thanks!

[DirtyHarry]

TannieS, maybe you were referring only to the shipping date? Can you check now please?

Thanks,

Harry

[TannieS]

This is what it says, even though I put today's date:

Creator's Shipping Date (MM/DD/YYYY) Yesterday

And my time is correct with the bottom (didn't even know that was there!!!)!!

Thank you for the help!