Actinide wrote:I mostly responded the way I did to HikingStick's comments because I honestly felt like he didn't even read what I wrote. If people want to respond with their opinions and comments, I hope that they would at least read what I had initially written.

He assumed that my partner had shipped and on the 19th, when clearly my trade partner said he was going to ship on the following Monday, the 22nd and as far as I know, had not shipped yet based on not hitting the "I have sent my cards" button. It's one thing to want to chime in on a topic, it's another to entirely skim over a post and make assumptions that just aren't there. Similarly, when he wanted to lecture me on reading the BTR guidelines, I had clearly posted within the rules and waited two weeks post-acceptance (once again, because I cannot wait two weeks post-shipment if shipment never occurs).

I had read it. While it was not marked shipped, the partner stated (if recalling the details correctly) that he was shipping on the 19th (or, per your comments, the following Monday). While some may never to forget to mark "I shipped my cards", I just got back from a trip out of town and realized that I had done just that. I just marked my cards shipped today, even though they went out on Wednesday. I was giving your trading partner the benefit of the doubt, and suggesting an adequate wait to allow for postal delays. In any case, no action would be taken until Sebi or Catinca emailed your partner and gave him/her a chance to respond.

Again (as per an earlier post), I apologize if my attempt to put the brakes on the process offended you in any way.

Kyrs wrote:About the de facto style of the current rating system; if an additional rating was added to +1 feedback, we could separate the rating of a trader's honesty (card sent, in (relatively) described condition) and a trader's conduct.

If a user selects +1, a simple 3-star rating element could display, possibly with each labeled Speed, Packaging, Attitude. Traders can give a 0, 1/2, or 1 rating in each category, or ratings can be a full a range 0, 1/2, 1 - 4 1/2, 5.
If the former is used, on a user's Trades/Feedback page, an expanded graphic could be displayed, showing the 3 categories as 3-star averages, e.g. for 3 1-star ratings and a half-star rating in one category would be shown as 2.5 stars; averaged, increased 300%, and rounded to nearest .5 (<.75).

This would leave +1 and -1 as either legit or scammer/dishonest, and neutral feedback can be eliminated, moving the feedback usually left there to the additional ratings of +1 feedback. This would give a permanent and visible place for relevant information on a trader's ethic.

Yep, multiple feedbacks sounds like a good idea! We'll think about adding that in some way.

I also realized someone mentioned people ditching and creating new accounts after negative feedback. If this is a genuine problem, perhaps phone number verification or address registration would hinder this. Before people can initiate or complete trades, they must either go through an SMS/text message confirmation, or register an address to their account. Numbers or addresses used this way cannot be used for other accounts without contacting admin.