Guys, while I agree totally with everything that you are posting. I have to follow a set of rules. I am fighting for this change though. 

The feedback system should give a broad view of the person as a whole. Negative feedback should be for those who had a "negative" time trading. If they got scammed, or if the other trader was rude, or what other things you could throw under "negative". Neutral should be more along the lines of hey trade went ok,but wont be trading with him again for these reasons. I have no idea what you would put under neutral, but I'm sure people could think of stuff. And positive should not be just for every trade. I mean sure you traded and things went ok, but if that's all that positive means, then it means practically nothing when you are trying to choose someone on the market place to deal with. 

I am totally against removing negative feedback unless it is a clear false feedback. I am going to support this through and through. We need a broader definition of our marketplace and we need it soon. 

 

First actual post I have read that makes sense.

 

However, I never scammed Scorpioz, so that is why my feedback keeps getting removed.

 

Actually, why don't we talk to a Super Mod or Administrator to find out how many times the member @Reaper purchased a $10 voucher, or how many times a $10 voucher that @Reaper purchased was redeemed by @ScorpioZ. I think you'll that that that number is ZERO.

 

Guys, while I agree totally with everything that you are posting. I have to follow a set of rules. I am fighting for this change though. 

The feedback system should give a broad view of the person as a whole. Negative feedback should be for those who had a "negative" time trading. If they got scammed, or if the other trader was rude, or what other things you could throw under "negative". Neutral should be more along the lines of hey trade went ok,but wont be trading with him again for these reasons. I have no idea what you would put under neutral, but I'm sure people could think of stuff. And positive should not be just for every trade. I mean sure you traded and things went ok, but if that's all that positive means, then it means practically nothing when you are trying to choose someone on the market place to deal with. 

I am totally against removing negative feedback unless it is a clear false feedback. I am going to support this through and through. We need a broader definition of our marketplace and we need it soon. 

 

First actual post I have read that makes sense.

 

However, I never scammed Scorpioz, so that is why my feedback keeps getting removed.

 

http://gyazo.com/83c154eda829f93278ff924941dcb7a7 I sure hope Scorpioz got a warning aswel otherwise you would be contradicting what you just said.

 

''The feedback system should give a broad view of the person as a whole. Negative feedback should be for those who had a "negative" time trading.''

 

I had a negative time trading, hence my negative feedback on scorpioz.

 

 

OH YOU JUST SCREWED YOURSELF MATE

 

"However, I never scammed Scorpioz, so that is why my feedback keeps getting removed."

"I had a negative time trading, hence my negative feedback on scorpioz."

 

Admitted to trading. Thanks for the proof 1 Hit M8

 

 

(proof of this post before he edits it)

 

 

I am sorry scorpioz, come back when you have an IQ level higher than your age..

 

TY

Edited July 30, 201312 yr by Reaper

This topic went from asking for a change on feedback to discussing whether or not Reaper scammed. 

Please sort this out or I will close this thread.

Hi Ely, thanks.

 

If I may could I ask that you clean up all posts made by Reaper/quotes from Reaper in the replies, and let all the other posts regarding whether or not reaper tried to / did scam them stay.

Let's be honest. If someone had a bad time because your internet blacked out, do you want your feedback to be negative, and nobody to ever trade with you again, this isn't ebay.

"I'm going to give him another negative feedback, and if it gets removed I'm done.'' - Quote scorpioz.

 

I guess I will see you on the flip side man.

cya hick

Because what is the point of doubling the system? If we allow negative feedback to float freely, we may as well stop banning people. Why? What's the point of leaving a negative feedback to ban the user? Who is to say what is just in a sense of a "legit" negative feedback? We do the best we can using the feedback system seeing it was created for a community-ruled market. Ours is moderated.