Should "Deadbeats" include those who don't leave r

[brettness37]

I think I will add to all my "for trade" postings:

If you send first, I will leave feedback as appropriate as soon as possible.
If I send first, and you are not willing to do the same, then please do not respond to this ad, as I will NEVER deal with blackmailers.

Guys, try to reason it out however you want, but it comes down to the fact that you are holding your feedback hostage until you are sure you will receive a good one in turn.... that is BLACKMAIL, plain and simple!


-Anglacon

It's not that I'm looking for a good ref, it's that the deal isn't done until both parties agree it's over and they are satisfied. If I ship second, and the other party says: "hey that spear tip you sent me was bent, this $400 army for army trade is off or I want $50 refunded to me to make up for it" how can I say "trade went off the wheels due to completely unreasonable demands" if I've already left my feedback? Or by the same token, what if a previously courteous trade partner becomes abusive or unreasonable over, say, delays in the postal system, over which I have no control?

On another side of it, as much as I want my feedback to show you all that I am an honest and integerous individual, I think the feedback I leave for others should mean something. After all, it is my name attached to that reference, and as such I want it to be accurate.

[MagickalMemories]

It's not that I'm looking for a good ref, it's that the deal isn't done until both parties agree it's over and they are satisfied. If I ship second, and the other party says: "hey that spear tip you sent me was bent, this $400 army for army trade is off or I want $50 refunded to me to make up for it" how can I say "trade went off the wheels due to completely unreasonable demands" if I've already left my feedback? Or by the same token, what if a previously courteous trade partner becomes abusive or unreasonable over, say, delays in the postal system, over which I have no control?

On another side of it, as much as I want my feedback to show you all that I am an honest and integerous individual, I think the feedback I leave for others should mean something. After all, it is my name attached to that reference, and as such I want it to be accurate.

This right here is the only argument...
Hmm... Argument = negative connotation...

This is the only discussion point that I have ever considered as a acceptable reason not to leave a ref immediately. It is valid and understandable. I definitely can't fault your reasoning. It's far better than the "I want to make sure I get a ref, too" thought -- which I just outright disagree with.

Eric

[brettness37]

This is the only discussion point that I have ever considered as a acceptable reason not to leave a ref immediately. It is valid and understandable. I definitely can't fault your reasoning. It's far better than the "I want to make sure I get a ref, too" thought -- which I just outright disagree with.

Eric

Totally, and as I've already stated, as soon as the other party finalizes the deal (does not require anything more from me except feedback), I leave a ref with a polite request that they do the same.

And the spot where it breaks down is when they choose NOT to

[ohioguy]

I hear ya Im waiting on 3 feedbacks for the last two months after 2 polite requests to each trader. And all 3 of them have posted new items and to boot one even responded to this thread.......

[myleftnut]

How about the ones that don't respond to repeated PMs at all, not just for feedback...

I second! I do most of my trading while at work, so I check my PM's often. Very irritating to see that someone has read my PM and has not responded. I'm waiting on two such culprits as we speak.

[JohnHwangBT]

And from a practical standpoint, just because I receive first, I will almost never leave Feedback first. If there's an issue with what I sent, such as when the Postal system screws up, then it's better to keep Feedback open until things are *completely* resolved on *both* sides.

I don't see the reasoning behind this. Why would you not leave feedback as soon as you receive your end of the bargain. Why should I have to wait for your end to succeed before I get my feedback? Your end of the deal should have absolutely nothing to do with my feedback in the deal. This is almost like you are holding my good feedback hostage until I leave you good feedback. Which means if I am a new trader, then I almost feel like I have to leave you good feedback in order to get my own rating, that I already fully deserve. That just doesn't seem fair.

Let's say that we agreed on a trade, and you sent me some stuff. I leave Positive Feedback.

Then I send your stuff. For whatever reason, there's a postal snafu. The package is damaged en route. I shipped with DC, and you didn't buy insurance. Granted that this isn't very likely, because I generally do an *excellent* job of packaging, but we're talking about a hypothetical situation.

From my POV, we're done, because YOU took the risk that damage would occur by not buying insurance. I demand positive Feedback in return, because I did *exactly* what I said I would: I packed your stuff and shipped it in a timely fashion. And according to the tracking, it was delivered.

You may not be happy with that result, so maybe want me to send a full set of replacement stuff. Insured. At my cost.

Now I consider your request to be unreasonable, and we can't reach agreement. Maybe you do some namecalling in the heat of the moment.

At this point, I'm still stuck having left Positive Feedback, rather than a more-appropriate Neutral or possibly Negative.


This is a hypothetical scenario, and I doubt any real-world situation would be this bad. But things can happen, and that is why I always prefer wait until the trade is fully completed on both sides.

In my trades (and I've got about 200 of them across several boards / sites), mostly, stuff goes OK. But sometimes you have issues. And the more you trade, the more chances you've had to see them go wrong, and had to deal with them. Which is why higher Feedback guys tend to have more detailed trading rules and hold Feedback until completion on both sides.

[CypherIsGod]

I guess I see the feedback as the other guy holding up his end of the bargain. I can't see not leaving someone positive feedback just because we have a disagreement. In the situation above, if you see his side as unreasonable, and he sees your side as not giving a crap because you did what you said you would do, does he really not deserve a positive reference for the trade? I can definitely see the point that maybe the whole trade should be looked at for the feedback, but to me it is a sign of how trustworthy they are to get me the stuff we agreed on. If there is a mishap from my side, postal damage, etc... then that is something beyond the trade in my eyes. That person should still get a positive feedback for getting you your stuff as agreed on. There's no way you can leave a negative just because the other guy is a jerk. That's not what it's about.

I guess the way I look at it is I really have to leave a positive if I got my stuff, so there's no reason for me to hold it back until he agrees with me on whatever else may happen. What if it is a new trader, and you are being unreasonable regarding the situation. He will almost have no choice but to agree to your terms, just to get that 2 feedback rating so he can make future trades. I personally see that as ITL intimidation.

I guess maybe I need something like that to happen to me in order to totally see the other point of view, though. Luckily it has not.

[JohnHwangBT]

I guess I see the feedback as the other guy holding up his end of the bargain. I can't see not leaving someone positive feedback just because we have a disagreement. In the situation above, if you see his side as unreasonable, and he sees your side as not giving a crap because you did what you said you would do, does he really not deserve a positive reference for the trade?

There's no way you can leave a negative just because the other guy is a jerk.

Good Feedback isn't just "I got my stuff".

Good Feedback is "I got my stuff, the guy was a pleasure to deal with, he shipped quickly, and packed-well."

Neutral Feedbaks is "I got my stuff, but..."
- the guy was a bag / hole / tool to deal with
- he took forever to ship, after lots of nagging and threats of BTR
- the order wasn't quite right
- stuff was damaged because he did a bad job packing

So the nature of the disgreement matters, and especially how it is resolved. If someone starts calling me names, I'm leaving a Neutral. If they renege or otherwise demand to change the terms mid-deal, I'm leaving a BAD.

Problem resolution *is* important because it will come up, eventually.

[MagickalMemories]

JHBT, you make a valid point.
In fact, that is the very reason that I don't hold it against someone when they wait for the trade to be complete on both ends before leaving feedback (note, this is different than MY DEFINITION of holding it hostage).

Keeping in line with your POV, I still think it's the responsibility of the first receiver to be the one to jump and leave the positive.

-------

One reason I think people disagree is because they view things differently.
Look at the differences of opinion on what a ref is/should be in the last 2 posts (by CiG and JHBT) for a perfect example.

I'm not saying either is right OR wrong... just explaining why I think we're seeing such differences of opinion.

Eric