Allow cancels over a certain percentage of Negatives

Reply

acsguitar Posted: 11-18-2009 10:10 AM

rated by 0 users

So I just got matched for a cheap game with a dude with 8 NEGATIVES!!! EIGHT!! He only has 35 transactions. SO I pretty much have a 25% chance of having to leave a guy a negative.

This seems kinda rediculous. If it wasn't a 150 points game I'd probably be pissed. Shouldn't there be a way to say "cancel" a trade if the seller has above a ceratin percentage of negatives?

Reply

DrJ079 replied on 11-18-2009 10:23 AM

rated by 0 users

Should there be a way?   Yes.    IMO once a user gets a couple negatives the buyer should have to an option to accept the trade or not.   It will take longer for them to get matches, that's the penalty for sucking.

Is this ever going to happen?   I doubt it.

Reply

acsguitar replied on 11-18-2009 10:27 AM

rated by 0 users

DrJ079:

Should there be a way?   Yes.    IMO once a user gets a couple negatives the buyer should have to an option to accept the trade or not.   It will take longer for them to get matches, that's the penalty for sucking.

Is this ever going to happen?   I doubt it.

I think it should be proportional though. I mean if Gnitro get's 1 negative over 80 sends a month I'd still trust him.

Reply

kuliddar replied on 11-18-2009 10:28 AM

rated by 0 users

Wow, that's almost 1/4 transactions are negs. I agree when there is a certain level of negs in accordance of the transaction volume, the buyer should have the right to have a special cancel button - give a time delay like the seller matched notification.

Of course, chances are that if your transaction goes foul, Goozex will clean up the mess, but a feature like this would certainly avoid a lot of headaches.

Reply

Kenny007 replied on 11-18-2009 10:30 AM

rated by 0 users

acsguitar:

DrJ079:

Should there be a way?   Yes.    IMO once a user gets a couple negatives the buyer should have to an option to accept the trade or not.   It will take longer for them to get matches, that's the penalty for sucking.

Is this ever going to happen?   I doubt it.

I think it should be proportional though. I mean if Gnitro get's 1 negative over 80 sends a month I'd still trust him.

Agreed, though there's that fine line to consider with new users getting a negative early.

On the one hand, there's really no reason for it.  On the other, it may turn their trading practices around. 

A users with 3 trades and 1 negative might crapout 33% of the time OR never make a mistake/scam again.

It would have been nice to have the chance to opt out of a few iffy trades of my own, but to be honest, I have been surprised before by very sketchy traders.

Join the Goozex Pokerstars Club!

GreenManGaming

Reply

DrJ079 replied on 11-18-2009 10:35 AM

rated by 0 users

acsguitar:

DrJ079:

Should there be a way?   Yes.    IMO once a user gets a couple negatives the buyer should have to an option to accept the trade or not.   It will take longer for them to get matches, that's the penalty for sucking.

Is this ever going to happen?   I doubt it.

I think it should be proportional though. I mean if Gnitro get's 1 negative over 80 sends a month I'd still trust him.

Of course.   You could come up with a decent formula for it that would flag people that both had a couple of recent negatives as well as people that fell below a certain percentage overall like 95% or something.    And you'd always have the option to accept the person's trade anyways if you felt it was within your own parameters.    It's not going to happen though.  

Reply

acsguitar replied on 11-18-2009 10:36 AM

rated by 0 users

Kenny007:

acsguitar:

DrJ079:

Should there be a way?   Yes.    IMO once a user gets a couple negatives the buyer should have to an option to accept the trade or not.   It will take longer for them to get matches, that's the penalty for sucking.

Is this ever going to happen?   I doubt it.

I think it should be proportional though. I mean if Gnitro get's 1 negative over 80 sends a month I'd still trust him.

Agreed, though there's that fine line to consider with new users getting a negative early.

On the one hand, there's really no reason for it.  On the other, it may turn their trading practices around. 

A users with 3 trades and 1 negative might crapout 33% of the time OR never make a mistake/scam again.

It would have been nice to have the chance to opt out of a few iffy trades of my own, but to be honest, I have been surprised before by very sketchy traders.

Agreed...maybe it should be scaled 3 negatives over 20 is WAY too much. 8 over 35 is an enourmous amount. 1 over. 2 over 10 stinks but I'd wait still I guess.

Reply

DrJ079 replied on 11-18-2009 10:41 AM

rated by 0 users

Kenny007:

acsguitar:

DrJ079:

Should there be a way?   Yes.    IMO once a user gets a couple negatives the buyer should have to an option to accept the trade or not.   It will take longer for them to get matches, that's the penalty for sucking.

Is this ever going to happen?   I doubt it.

I think it should be proportional though. I mean if Gnitro get's 1 negative over 80 sends a month I'd still trust him.

Agreed, though there's that fine line to consider with new users getting a negative early.

On the one hand, there's really no reason for it.  On the other, it may turn their trading practices around. 

A users with 3 trades and 1 negative might crapout 33% of the time OR never make a mistake/scam again.

It would have been nice to have the chance to opt out of a few iffy trades of my own, but to be honest, I have been surprised before by very sketchy traders.

You really have to do a lot for a negative though.   You can send someone a scratched up disc, no manual or case, that looks like garbage but actually plays when they requested full package and still get a neutral.   

On average there's such a small percentage of people that get negatives that don't full deserve them that to me you're just catering to the lowest form of trader by worrying about whether you rub them the wrong way.

Reply

acsguitar replied on 11-18-2009 10:44 AM

rated by 0 users

DrJ079:

Kenny007:

acsguitar:

DrJ079:

Should there be a way?   Yes.    IMO once a user gets a couple negatives the buyer should have to an option to accept the trade or not.   It will take longer for them to get matches, that's the penalty for sucking.

Is this ever going to happen?   I doubt it.

I think it should be proportional though. I mean if Gnitro get's 1 negative over 80 sends a month I'd still trust him.

Agreed, though there's that fine line to consider with new users getting a negative early.

On the one hand, there's really no reason for it.  On the other, it may turn their trading practices around. 

A users with 3 trades and 1 negative might crapout 33% of the time OR never make a mistake/scam again.

It would have been nice to have the chance to opt out of a few iffy trades of my own, but to be honest, I have been surprised before by very sketchy traders.

You really have to do a lot for a negative though.   You can send someone a scratched up disc, no manual or case, that looks like garbage but actually plays when they requested full package and still get a neutral.   

On average there's such a small percentage of people that get negatives that don't full deserve them that to me you're just catering to the lowest form of trader by worrying about whether you rub them the wrong way.

This dude had 6 of his 8 negs as "Game never showed" and 2 as "Wrong game" although I believe cause he didn't include a required item like a MIC

Reply

DrJ079 replied on 11-18-2009 10:49 AM

rated by 0 users

acsguitar:

DrJ079:

Kenny007:

acsguitar:

DrJ079:

Should there be a way?   Yes.    IMO once a user gets a couple negatives the buyer should have to an option to accept the trade or not.   It will take longer for them to get matches, that's the penalty for sucking.

Is this ever going to happen?   I doubt it.

I think it should be proportional though. I mean if Gnitro get's 1 negative over 80 sends a month I'd still trust him.

Agreed, though there's that fine line to consider with new users getting a negative early.

On the one hand, there's really no reason for it.  On the other, it may turn their trading practices around. 

A users with 3 trades and 1 negative might crapout 33% of the time OR never make a mistake/scam again.

It would have been nice to have the chance to opt out of a few iffy trades of my own, but to be honest, I have been surprised before by very sketchy traders.

You really have to do a lot for a negative though.   You can send someone a scratched up disc, no manual or case, that looks like garbage but actually plays when they requested full package and still get a neutral.   

On average there's such a small percentage of people that get negatives that don't full deserve them that to me you're just catering to the lowest form of trader by worrying about whether you rub them the wrong way.

This dude had 6 of his 8 negs as "Game never showed" and 2 as "Wrong game" although I believe cause he didn't include a required item like a MIC

Yeah, there's no doubt that the account should have some penalties.   

Cancel doesn't really work all that well because the guy can claim he shipped the thing already by the time you receive your match email.    It would need to be a system where the buyer can opt out before it's even considered a match.

Reply

acsguitar replied on 11-18-2009 10:53 AM

rated by 0 users

DrJ079:

acsguitar:

DrJ079:

Kenny007:

acsguitar:

DrJ079:

Should there be a way?   Yes.    IMO once a user gets a couple negatives the buyer should have to an option to accept the trade or not.   It will take longer for them to get matches, that's the penalty for sucking.

Is this ever going to happen?   I doubt it.

I think it should be proportional though. I mean if Gnitro get's 1 negative over 80 sends a month I'd still trust him.

Agreed, though there's that fine line to consider with new users getting a negative early.

On the one hand, there's really no reason for it.  On the other, it may turn their trading practices around. 

A users with 3 trades and 1 negative might crapout 33% of the time OR never make a mistake/scam again.

It would have been nice to have the chance to opt out of a few iffy trades of my own, but to be honest, I have been surprised before by very sketchy traders.

You really have to do a lot for a negative though.   You can send someone a scratched up disc, no manual or case, that looks like garbage but actually plays when they requested full package and still get a neutral.   

On average there's such a small percentage of people that get negatives that don't full deserve them that to me you're just catering to the lowest form of trader by worrying about whether you rub them the wrong way.

This dude had 6 of his 8 negs as "Game never showed" and 2 as "Wrong game" although I believe cause he didn't include a required item like a MIC

Yeah, there's no doubt that the account should have some penalties.   

Cancel doesn't really work all that well because the guy can claim he shipped the thing already by the time you receive your match email.    It would need to be a system where the buyer can opt out before it's even considered a match.

Exactly like in Ebay you can choose to not accpet bids from people with negatives