LastDodo site & app/Feedback system live!143 messages

Can I also give negative feedback about a shop that approached me at the end of 2009, because it saw that I was looking for a comic. After payment I never heard anything again, not even a response after several emails from me. So I got scammed for 25 euros.

In this case, I really like the opportunity for feedback. Incidentally, it is the only negative experience I have had.

then you still report to the police if you really think you have been cheated?

Wouldn't it be better to first ask René for help? Often (hopefully) it is based on a misunderstanding ...... Police often cannot help you with something like that, lack of manpower / time, setting priorities etc. etc.

@dorosaurus, I will contact you because I would of course like to know which shop it is. I would also like to contact the seller.

I still don't know what to do with shops where the transaction did not go through.

Giving negative feedback should not be.

Neutral also seems wrong.

And positive cannot be right either, because then you could just collect positive feedback by not selling anything you have in your shop.

I would like to have a button that says: Order canceled.

Or is there a better option?

Maybe that is a good solution yes. Now and then negative feedback is given for this reason and that is certainly not the intention.

Well, judging by all the responses (and most of them not so positive) it appears that the whole feedback system is not very well thought out and 'rattles' on all sides.

My suggestion is therefore to omit this option until a good and reliable system is in place.

The system of eBay, for example, is issued because people then run into acts of revenge. Personally, I think that is not too bad and is always preferable to an option such as at Catawiki, where only a buyer can proceed to such (often unjustified) 'revenge action'.

Well, then you haven't looked at eBay for a long time, Poveia. It has already abolished feedback from sellers for a long time, to prevent revenge or blackmail, among other things. I certainly also see the positive reactions in the forum. Moreover, satisfied people are 'quietly satisfied'.

I mean of course negative feedback from sellers that has been deprecated on ebay.

@ Poveia, most of the responses I see in this topic and get through the mail are positive. This applies in any case to buyers, but also to many sellers. In the first week of the feedback system, feedback has already been given almost 4,000 times. Only 2% of that is negative feedback. There are shops that have received feedback 150 or more times with 100% positive feedback.

But there is no doubt that there is room for improvement in our feedback system and we are open to that. So please indicate what you would like to see differently.

By the way, I understand that it is sour if you receive unfairly negative feedback. We certainly want to do something about this in the following situations that are good for us to test:

1. Someone is clearly giving nonsensical feedback, for example by only giving negative feedback to multiple sellers without clear explanation. This has happened once and it has been the only time we have intervened so far.

2. Someone orders something and the seller happens to be unable to deliver for an explainable reason. The seller informs the buyer of this neatly and does not allow any money to be transferred. We do not think this is a reason to give negative feedback and that is also stated if you are going to give feedback.

If one of these two situations occurs, a salesperson can report it to me and we will look into it and do something about it if necessary. We will never do that lightly, so it must be clear to us that negative feedback has been wrongly given.

It appears that eBay has indeed stopped being able to assess buyers by sellers. In the past I could and I heard many stories about blackmail-like situations ("if you give me negative feedback, I will do that to you too"). I don't think anyone benefits from that and I think eBay found out.

René,

I have to agree with you to a large extent.

I spoke a bit 'out of turn' (because I became the 'victim' myself), but I agree with you that there is still room for improvement.

In all responses from buyers / sellers you can probably already read some suggestions that are useful. I am not going to add unnecessary suggestions, because this would be a repetition of moves.

I just wonder how you deal with buyers who do not adhere to point 2 mentioned by you. You can mention that certain developments are not a reason for negative feedback, but what if that buyer ignores that?

But in any case, it is very good to hear that you want to address incorrectly given negative feedback. In my view, that is already a good step towards a sound feedback system.

It appears that eBay has indeed stopped being able to assess buyers by sellers.

Close,

.... but no cigar. eBay has stopped allowing sellers to provide negative or neutral feedback. Positive feedback, for example for quick payers, is still possible.

Positive feedback, for example for quick payers, is still possible.

Of course we could do that too. Do you think that adds a lot?

Difficult question. At eBay you must be a 'member' to be able to buy. At Catawiki you just need to be a member to be able to sell. I can only speak for myself, but more than half of my 'customers' are not members of Catawiki. It is no use in that category to receive feedback anyway. Staying about the members. I suspect that almost all of them are also salespeople. After all, every collector has duplicate and redundant things. So the lion's share of the 'members' can already get feedback as a seller. Assuming that a trustworthy seller will generally also be a trustworthy buyer, I think that being able to put a spring in buyers doesn't add much for the time being.

Maybe when Catawiki becomes bigger and more international and a buyer registration is desired or necessary. But the problem remains identifying the bad apples and it doesn't really help with that.

In principe is het feedback systeem een goede zaak
Ik vind het een slecht en weinig doordacht idee om met terugwerkende kracht feedback te kunnen geven over geannuleerde orders.
Feedback over geannuleerde orders is zo-wie-zo al een riskante zaak.
Als je de klant extra info geeft en hij haakt af, of de portokosten vallen tegen, is het toch moeilijk om je te verdedigen tegen neutrale of negatieve feedback.

Als een klant bestelt en vervolgens niet betaald of reageert, heeft hij toch de mogelijkheid om negatieve feedback te geven. Is de klant lid van Catawiki, dan is hij toch beter benaderbaar.

Bij Ebay, wat toch het grote voorbeeld is, moet je ingelogd, dus lid zijn om zelfs maar te kunnen kijken. Alleen met wat kunstgrepen kan je op de site rondkijken, maar zodra je wat wilt, moet je inloggen en dus lid zijn.

Daarnaast geeft Ebay  bemiddeling om een conflict op te lossen.

De koper gaat verplichtingen aan en de verkoper heeft verplichtingen, het is geen vrijblijvend zakendoen.

Ebay is begonnen als een site voor kopers en verkopers, vandaar dat het feedbacksysteem twee kanten op werkt, je krijgt zowel punten bij koop  als bij verkoop.

Ebay heeft zich ontwikkeld als een pure verkoopsite en het aantal punten en status is erg belangrijk geworden.

Voor een verkoper is de feedback van een koper alleen een formaliteit en onbelangrijk als de klant maar aan zijn verplichtingen voldoet.

Ik ben het er mee eens dat Catawiki gekozen  heeft om geen feedback aan kopers te geven.

Catawiki wil open en toegankelijk zijn voor iedereen, maar het is beter om pas te kunnen bestellen als iemand lid geworden is. Dat geeft een binding naar beide zijden en is gunstig voor de groei van Catawiki.

Ik kan overwegen om in mijn shopvoorwaarden op te nemen dat er niet geleverd wordt aan mensen die geen lid zijn, maar dat vrijwaart mij nog niet van feedback van die klanten als Catawiki die deur gewoon openlaat en er zijn grappenmakers bij.

In principle, the feedback system is a good thing
I think it's a bad and ill-thought-out idea to be able to provide retroactive feedback on canceled orders.
Feedback on canceled orders is a risky business anyway.
If you give the customer extra information and he drops out, or the postage costs are disappointing, it is still difficult to defend yourself against neutral or negative feedback.

If a customer orders and then does not pay or respond, he still has the opportunity to leave negative feedback. If the customer is a member of Catawiki, he is still more approachable.

At Ebay, which is the great example, you have to be logged in, so be a member to even be able to look. You can only look around the site with some tricks, but as soon as you want something, you have to log in and be a member.

In addition, Ebay  mediation to resolve a conflict.

The buyer assumes obligations and the seller has obligations, it is not a non-committal business.

Ebay started out as a site for buyers and sellers hence the feedback system works both ways, you get both points when you buy  as with sale.

Ebay has developed as a pure sales site and the number of points and status has become very important.

For a seller, a buyer's feedback is only a formality and unimportant as long as the customer meets his obligations.

I agree that Catawiki chose not to leave feedback to buyers.

Catawiki wants to be open and accessible to everyone, but it is better to only be able to order once someone has become a member. This creates a bond on both sides and is beneficial for Catawiki's growth.

I may consider including in my shop terms and conditions that I do not deliver to people who are not members, but that does not exempt me from feedback from those customers if Catawiki just leaves that door open and there are pranksters.

Catawiki wants to be open and accessible to everyone, but it is better not to be able to order until someone has become a member.

This is an interesting idea in itself. I agree that this is more desirable from a feedback point of view because it is indeed easier to approach and address the user. However, we have deliberately not done this so far to make the threshold to order as low as possible. If new users have to register first, this could be a moment of dropping out in the buying process. How do other sellers think about this? An alternative is to be able to order without registering, but you still have to if you want to give feedback.

Just back to basics: why is someone going to register?

The advantages of registration must therefore be expanded and clearly explained. Then the number of registrations will also go up.

Personally, I am against thresholds to buy, this also does not happen in a physical store.
An unknown customer will also complain in a physical store if the product is not good. So even an unregistered buyer can give feedback about his purchase.

I do not think it is necessary for buyers to register first.

There is a big difference between Catawiki and eBay in the sense that the buyer is clearly the weaker party at Catawiki. He (m \ v) must first transfer money and then wait to see if something will be returned. At eBay, buyer protection has now gone so far that sellers are starting to drop out because they are virtually powerless against rogue buyers. A buyer who claims that he has not received the shipment will by definition receive his money back via Paypal and the seller must try to prove that the buyer is in bad faith. Then a good buyer reputation makes sense.

In the Catawiki format, where buyer protection is still on the back burner, seller reputation is much more important.

@Pegag

Your claim that buyers should transfer money first is not always correct.
There are several shops (including ours) that usually ship before the money is transferred.

Paypal is an expensive eBay selling system. It is much better to rely on trust in people than to be suspicious of every customer. It is (fortunately) a rarity that there is no payment, consider this as shoplifting in a physical store.

In my opinion, the buyer protection is well arranged, at the pro-shops there is a right to return if the quality is not in accordance. The pro shops are also committed to building a good name.

The customer is king (but not always emperor)

My position was that feedback on canceled orders is a tricky business.

Aside from the myriad reasons why an order doesn't go through, one side that doesn't respond to mail and doesn't pay and is still allowed to provide feedback, I think it's a bad idea if this isn't a member.

In many of the cases there is no problem with cancellations, but there are wild cards and when I change the status of an order and there is an automatic message to the buyer that opens the door to conflicts that you cannot defend against. This is arranged differently at Ebay and a lot of tuition has been paid there.

If someone is a member of Catawiki, I think there is a better opportunity to resolve matters.

I'll give an example:

Someone from Belgium from outside the club orders a 1 euro strip. I send an invoice with the shipping costs, but then the same strip costs 4.08 euros. The customer has not paid and is not responding to my emails, which is very understandable given the price toname.

If I cancel this order I can get a negative feedback for the sum of 1 euro trade and I cannot do anything about it and that can never be the intention of the system.

Non-members can order, but not give feedback seems logical to me.

That's an incentive to become a member.

idd see something if buyers can only provide feedback

if they are members of catawiki

Ok, we are convinced :-)

We will adjust it so that you can only give feedback if you have registered and are logged in. That is not ready immediately, so please be patient

It's great that you agree that we should not impose barriers in the buying process and we should keep it so that you can order without being logged in.

Thank you for your helpful feedback!

I gave someone wrong feedback. How can I change that (from bad to good)?

With good feedback I can still change.

order 34687

stands with Negative Feedback.

but has been canceled.

so please delete it.

Please also delete feedback from non-Catawiki users asap.

Mvg Koen