Subject:
|
Re: Good Trader List proposed
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.market.theory
|
Date:
|
Fri, 3 Dec 1999 01:03:31 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
RSANDERS@GATE.NETstopspam
|
Viewed:
|
368 times
|
| |
|
|
Just to confuse matters even more... Recently I ran an auction on eBay
to sell an 'Android Base'. The high bidder had less that favorable
feedback. Rather than just toss in the towel, I made sure my intentions
(as the seller) were clear and unambiguous. He paid. Less than two weeks
at that. So just because someone screws up royally, it doesn't mean that
they won't clean up their act (nor does it mean they will).
Back to the subject matter:
Is the feedback system on eBay patented ? If not, I think that this is
a good model. It allows folks to leave positive history for good dealing
and negative for bad ones. In the end, it all sorts itself out
Ray
David Eaton wrote:
>
> Actually, I'd rather like the idea of a comprehensive list, rather than an
> exclusively bad or exclusively good list. For example, let's say Joe X. is a
> "bad" trader. Suppose 14 people have dealt with Joe and have all gotten burned.
> If he advertises that he's got a great set and I try to buy it and look for his
> name on the "good" list, I won't find it. And if we don't have a bad list, I
> won't find it there either. Hence, I'd probably assume him to be a well
> intentioned newbie, and I'd most likely get burned as well, and nobody can
> benefit from my experience except him, who walks away with my money.
>
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Good Trader List proposed
|
| (...) Actually, I'd rather like the idea of a comprehensive list, rather than an exclusively bad or exclusively good list. For example, let's say Joe X. is a "bad" trader. Suppose 14 people have dealt with Joe and have all gotten burned. If he (...) (25 years ago, 1-Dec-99, to lugnet.market.theory)
|
11 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
