New Feedback Feature - Detailed Ratings

[mikesilvia]

Some really good feedback! As always, if the features becomes unpopular it will be removed.

If you trade even a little eventually your score will reflect how you do business. After 50 trades you can't blame your ratings on the subjectiveness of the system. Most people tend to give too high of scores anyway. I have a feeling people will just give 5 ratings on to everyone unless their were some major problems.

If a member sends late and is unreachable by PM and e-mail, shouldn't he be rated that way? This allows members to see why a member got a Neutral or Negative feedback. If a member is unreachable by PM for 30 days and sends out 30 days late his ratings should reflect that.

Let's try it out and see how it goes! :)

[DirtyHarry]

TannieS, correct date should be shown now :)

[TannieS]

TannieS, correct date should be shown now :)

Bingo!!!

Thank you for looking into it! It's one new feature I really like!!!

[bbcards4sale]

I have to agree with the members having issues with this new feedback rating system.

It's very subjective and in a way, unfair, because you can do everything perfect but some traders don't rate that way and can be very unclear as they don't communicate to what the problem was, even though there probably was none.

Their written feedback shows that the transaction was perfect, but when #'s become involved it becomes another story. Those 2 feedback options never match up, why is that?

You can package the cards with loads of protection, PM the trader whenever new status comes, provide them with a DC#, ship the day the payment/cards arrive and they receive the merchandise within 2-4 days. But it's still not good enough?

This is just my opinion and my overall experience with it. Other than this new feature, I know that the people behind the scenes of SCF are doing a great job and there is no other trading site that comes close to SCF.

Thank you.

[andrewcstein]

I have to agree with the members having issues with this new feedback rating system.

It's very subjective and in a way, unfair, because you can do everything perfect but some traders don't rate that way and can be very unclear as they don't communicate to what the problem was, even though there probably was none.

Their written feedback shows that the transaction was perfect, but when #'s become involved it becomes another story. Those 2 feedback options never match up, why is that?

You can package the cards with loads of protection, PM the trader whenever new status comes, provide them with a DC#, ship the day the payment/cards arrive and they receive the merchandise within 2-4 days. But it's still not good enough?

This is just my opinion and my overall experience with it. Other than this new feature, I know that the people behind the scenes of SCF are doing a great job and there is no other trading site that comes close to SCF.

Thank you.

I agree entirely. I think if someone posts something other than a 5, they should have to put an explanation.

[bbcards4sale]

I agree entirely. I think if someone posts something other than a 5, they should have to put an explanation.

Exactly, I think there are too many flaws in a system like this for SCF.

If you go to another popular trading board (will not mention name in the thread) traders with a 4.9 or 4.8 rating are frowned upon. And for those that have lower than a 4.8, well, I'm sure you get the picture and are rarely ever dealt with.

Place the SCF old feedback system back into place, as it's SCF's feedback system and not a competitor of someone else's, which has already set the bar in an area like this. SCF is in a place all on its own, why altar the traders' reputations and status, when their 100% feedback speaks for itself. I believe this new # rating system is more hurting than helping the SCF trading community.

[TannieS]

I still have to agree with this - get rid of this 5 star rating system and put it back to the old one.

I think the old one still has its problems, such as "must send first" traders STILL not getting it!!!

[mikesilvia]

I'm not going to stop this new rating system because a few traders don't like a 4.9. A 4.9 may be a 5 because it becomes the highest rating on SCF. I will re-look at making it better, but I'm not getting rid of it because traders are not getting perfect scores and they feel they should have higher scores. Over time, if you have a 4.5 or higher you are a good trader. People rate differently, but over time people that use white envelopes to send high end cards or ship late will start to get low ratings.

We will keep it as is and continue to look at feedback. No feedback system will be perfect, but hopefully we can come close. I will read through all the feedback on this thread and work to improve it.

[bbcards4sale]

I'm not going to stop this new rating system because a few traders don't like a 4.9. A 4.9 may be a 5 because it becomes the highest rating on SCF. I will re-look at making it better, but I'm not getting rid of it because traders are not getting perfect scores and they feel they should have higher scores. Over time, if you have a 4.5 or higher you are a good trader. People rate differently, but over time people that use white envelopes to send high end cards or ship late will start to get low ratings.

We will keep it as is and continue to look at feedback. No feedback system will be perfect, but hopefully we can come close. I will read through all the feedback on this thread and work to improve it.

I appreciate you looking into it, thank you.

But as far as you saying a 4.5 or higher is a good rating on SCF, I would have to disagree and so will many traders on the site. We have worked very hard to keep our feedback 100% positive and then this new rating system gets put into place and no one is perfect anymore, just questionable.

It also seems that traders are afraid to rate mods, as I mainly see 5.0 ratings on them all, do traders think or know that mods can see what the actual #'s are?

This is a very unbalanced system and I believe it's hurting more than helping and those with their 100% feedback ratings can now be thrown out the door, as they will now be pieced apart.
Like I said earlier, a trader does everything the way it's supposed to be, but since that trader had a bad day or just wanted to play around, he made that reflect the # rating.

I, as a specific trader/buyer/seller, pack and secure all my cards safely, I communicate through PM's and replies everytime something changes (payment arrives, cards arrive, etc.), I PM DC#'s and I ship out the day or day after receiving the other persons end. After that, it only takes 1-4 business days to receive (that's PO delivery time).
So where are the discrepensies there? There are none, but since a bad day was upon them, their high score in the arcade gets beat (it's already happened to me and I've received many rude PM's about it, that's why I no longer play games in the arcade) or since you didn't trade a specific card to another trader, that's their friend, I'll rate you on that, so on and so on.

As far as PWE's for high end cards and late shippers, I have seen many people give out neutrals and negatives for this. Those things don't slip by traders.

It's strange how this new system was started and then it was altered due to traders requesting that the first 10 ratings go invisible, so that the person receiving #erd feedback wouldn't see what was actually rated on them. That already started a red flag to me, as people already wanted to hide behind #'s.

[gladdyontherise]

I appreciate you looking into it, thank you.

But as far as you saying a 4.5 or higher is a good rating on SCF, I would have to disagree and so will many traders on the site. We have worked very hard to keep our feedback 100% positive and then this new rating system gets put into place and no one is perfect anymore, just questionable.

It also seems that traders are afraid to rate mods, as I mainly see 5.0 ratings on them all, do traders think or know that mods can see what the actual #'s are?

This is a very unbalanced system and I believe it's hurting more than helping and those with their 100% feedback ratings can now be thrown out the door, as they will now be pieced apart.
Like I said earlier, a trader does everything the way it's supposed to be, but since that trader had a bad day or just wanted to play around, he made that reflect the # rating.

I, as a specific trader/buyer/seller, pack and secure all my cards safely, I communicate through PM's and replies everytime something changes (payment arrives, cards arrive, etc.), I PM DC#'s and I ship out the day or day after receiving the other persons end. After that, it only takes 1-4 business days to receive (that's PO delivery time).
So where are the discrepensies there? There are none, but since a bad day was upon them, their high score in the arcade gets beat (it's already happened to me and I've received many rude PM's about it, that's why I no longer play games in the arcade) or since you didn't trade a specific card to another trader, that's their friend, I'll rate you on that, so on and so on.

As far as PWE's for high end cards and late shippers, I have seen many people give out neutrals and negatives for this. Those things don't slip by traders.

It's strange how this new system was started and then it was altered due to traders requesting that the first 10 ratings go invisible, so that the person receiving #erd feedback wouldn't see what was actually rated on them. That already started a red flag to me, as people already wanted to hide behind #'s.

the part i bolded i agree with to a degree, the part i agree with is i dont think it'd be fair for mods to see feedback ratings and not us the members, i think each member is intitled to seeing there OWN feedback ratings, but not anyone elses.

how are we suppose to know if we are getting false ratings? if you have 10 trades and a 5.0 rating then someone puts a 4 it will go down a tick, how are you suppose to know who did it if multiple people left feedback before you could see?

there are flaws, and i find this as the biggest one, also because i've brought this up before and i dont think it was even addressed....but us shill bidders dont always get the questions answered