All that happens is that there feedback score is effected. Shouldn't it more severe so people would not cheat the system?
I feel much the same way you do. If I receive something less than I request I'm pretty annoyed as I'll probably have a hard time getting rid of the game. In a situation like that, I'd try to work something out with the seller so I'm not stuck with something I don't want.
Forum Moderator
I think it would be neat if a neutral feedback gav 50% or even 25% or your points back. Hey, if I only got a portion of what I requested, shouldn't the seller only get a portion of the points?
Perhaps a live badger should be placed down their pants?
tkszeto: I think it would be neat if a neutral feedback gav 50% or even 25% or your points back. Hey, if I only got a portion of what I requested, shouldn't the seller only get a portion of the points?
i can see the headaches arising from such a change now
they should either make the person not get all the points. Another option is to give the person a warning and then short amount of suspension or games on hold. If the user continues doing this they should then get banned for abusing the system.
Its not fair to people who wait for a game they want and then get a cd only and are disapointed.
What I find annoying is that people are that dishonest and feel they must list something incorrectly. If a user is a repeat offender Goozex deals with them, so I take comfort in that.
cheeznrice:What I find annoying is that people are that dishonest and feel they must list something incorrectly.
It's a shame that there aren't more users that take pride in their game condition or trades; i've changed format pending overall condition of manual/case based on what i would or wouldn't like to receive
I believe not receiving the package you requested should be grounds for a neg. people shouldnt be that dumb, or too lazy to change it when they add it to their list.
Halo 3 MVP x5.
I-Weapon-X: Perhaps a live badger should be placed down their pants?
Perhaps a Canadian?
I-Weapon-X: tkszeto: I think it would be neat if a neutral feedback gav 50% or even 25% or your points back. Hey, if I only got a portion of what I requested, shouldn't the seller only get a portion of the points? i can see the headaches arising from such a change now
Good point...
To do that, they'd have to pick a cut-off date of when this would apply. Then you'd get a WHOLE bunch of angry people e-mailing and complaining about how they want their points back from previous trades... True lots of headaches, but I still think it's fair. Not going to happen, but fair :-)
Well the cut off would start as soon as the system is made because of lack of abilities to chnage the stuff that happened before. It is meant to be a way to prevent not resolve past issues.
tkszeto: I-Weapon-X: tkszeto: I think it would be neat if a neutral feedback gav 50% or even 25% or your points back. Hey, if I only got a portion of what I requested, shouldn't the seller only get a portion of the points? i can see the headaches arising from such a change now Good point... To do that, they'd have to pick a cut-off date of when this would apply. Then you'd get a WHOLE bunch of angry people e-mailing and complaining about how they want their points back from previous trades... True lots of headaches, but I still think it's fair. Not going to happen, but fair :-)
I'm in favor of a "reverse tip" to discourage users from listing incorrectly.
For games 500 points or less, 50 points should be transferred back from the seller's account to the buyer's account.
For games 550 points or more, 100 points should be transferred back from the seller's account to the buyer's account.
I know people are tossing around numbers like 25% and 50%, but I think that's a little much. A 50- or 100-point credit compensates the buyer for relisting and reshipping the game out to another Goozex user.
Making the penalty too large allows the potential for exploitation. If you send out a complete copy of a game to a buyer and the buyer says "The manual wasn't included", you really have no recourse unless you took pictures of everything beforehand. Incidents like that would be more common if the buyer had the chance to get a significant portion of their points refunded.
I'm more interested in compensating the buyer than penalizing the seller. But I do agree that people exploit this "loophole" more often than I would like. While I admittedly have goofed once or twice and forgot a piece of the full package (sending it to the buyer, usually with some sort of an "I'm sorry" booby prize), no incomplete package I received was the result of an accident. They were the result of users that wanted to jump up in the queue.
To clarify, the "reverse tip" would automatically be applied when - and only when - neutral feedback is given, and the resulting dispute is resolved.
I'm not advocating giving buyers the power to just randomly award themselves 50- and 100-point refunds for whatever reason.
Well thought out suggestion R2K, but I'm sticking with the badger idea.
Follow me on Twitter!