A Commitment to Community: Updates to Our Product

[woofy31]

Wasn’t someone reporting here that they got banned when they blocked someone?

I allow people to message me at any time and to block a buyer would take away that benefit from them, even if they are a bad buyer. I’m not sure but it sounded to me like her banning was the result of blocking a previous buyer.

If you tell a buyer something like unlimited revisions, then block them, they can’t get unlimited revisions.

I’ve blocked several existing buyers from ordering again (via the new Block feature from their profiles), buyers who kept ordering my gig just to cancel over and over again, and I’m still here 🙂

[misscrystal]

This has the possibility of being abused by dishonest sellers, to get rid of buyers they somehow didn’t deliver what they promised to.

[nikavoice]

Just block the troublesome buyers 😉

CS told me that we can only block buyers from ordering again if they purchased at least once from us in the past.

CS said it’s not possible to block a user from making a first purchase - they have to make a purchase, and only then you can block them from buying again.

But that defies the whole purpose of being able to block buyers :roll_eyes:

P.S. if I use the “report” thing to block a user in Inbox, they still can make a purchase :roll_eyes:

CS said it’s not possible to block a user from making a first purchase - they have to make a purchase, and only then you can block them from buying again.

My first impression was that we can block Buyers during an initial interaction, to prevent them from purchasing a gig. However, I learned this as well… I’ll iterate one purchase could be disastrous for Sellers. 🥶

[cyaxrex]

Just block the troublesome buyers 😉

CS told me that we can only block buyers from ordering again if they purchased at least once from us in the past.

CS said it’s not possible to block a user from making a first purchase - they have to make a purchase, and only then you can block them from buying again.

But that defies the whole purpose of being able to block buyers :roll_eyes:

P.S. if I use the “report” thing to block a user in Inbox, they still can make a purchase :roll_eyes:

CS said it’s not possible to block a user from making a first purchase - they have to make a purchase, and only then you can block them from buying again.

I can confirm this. The only person I have been able to block is a buyer who requested cancellation immediately after delivery. (The order was cancelled).

Sadly, I don’t think it worked. A new to Fiverr buyer with the same style of poor English and purposefully vague instructions ordered 3-days later… Now I’m literally just waiting on the dispute message.

[woofy31]

This has the possibility of being abused by dishonest sellers, to get rid of buyers they somehow didn’t deliver what they promised to.

This has the possibility of being abused by dishonest sellers

That is true, but buyers have more power as they can just take their money back by force if they were scammed. But sellers are scammed by buyers into giving free work over and over without having any power - now they can block the buyers who scam them.

[misscrystal]

What if a seller says unlimited revisions, then after doing one or two, blocks the buyer so they can’t ask for more?

[misscrystal]

I’ve had buyers order from me immediately after I told them not to order from me. This is a huge improvement if we can block them. I had one who did not understand English and ordered in spite of me telling him not to order and had to cancel it. This happens quite a bit, for various reasons.

I’ve had buyers order from me immediately after I told them not to order from me. This is a huge improvement if we can block them.

So much for that idea.

[woofy31]

What if a seller says unlimited revisions, then after doing one or two, blocks the buyer so they can’t ask for more?

What if a seller says unlimited revisions, then after doing one or two, blocks the buyer so they can’t ask for more?

The buyer has the power to ask CS to investigate, and CS would demote or ban the dishonest seller.

But a seller has no such power.

[cyaxrex]

This has the possibility of being abused by dishonest sellers

That is true, but buyers have more power as they can just take their money back by force if they were scammed. But sellers are scammed by buyers into giving free work over and over without having any power - now they can block the buyers who scam them.

But sellers are scammed by buyers into giving free work over and over with no power, now they can block the scammers.

I’ve also heard a rumor that if sellers complain directly to sources where their work is being used online (after a chargeback and after buyers have been banned by Fiverr) Fiverr still considers this off-Fiverr communication. 😦

[maitasun]

Just block the troublesome buyers 😉

CS told me that we can only block buyers from ordering again if they purchased at least once from us in the past.

CS said it’s not possible to block a user from making a first purchase - they have to make a purchase, and only then you can block them from buying again.

But that defies the whole purpose of being able to block buyers :roll_eyes:

P.S. if I use the “report” thing to block a user in Inbox, they still can make a purchase :roll_eyes:

CS told me that we can only block buyers from ordering again if they purchased at least once from us in the past.

CS said it’s not possible to block a user from making a first purchase - they have to make a purchase, and only then you can block them from buying again.

You can’t block someone just because “you think he might do” something against you. And if he doesn’t? That’s the problem with segregation and discrimination. Would you like to be discriminated or segregated just because someone thinks you might do xxxx? I think not and I would support you desliking it.

It’s just about the same as saying you’ll not be tasting an icecream because you think you might not like it 😉 It makes no sense, don’t you think?😃 First you taste it, then you decide whether you like it or not. The same goes with blocking a new buyer.

P.S. if I use the “report” thing to block a user in Inbox, they still can make a purchase :roll_eyes:

Yes, the report on the inbox is just for blocking messaging, the one on the buyer’s/seller’s profile goes straght to the Trust & Security Team who will ckeck the report.

[misscrystal]

But sellers are scammed by buyers into giving free work over and over with no power, now they can block the scammers.

I’ve also heard a rumor that if sellers complain directly to sources where their work is being used online (after a chargeback and after buyers have been banned by Fiverr) Fiverr still considers this off-Fiverr communication. 😦

That wouldn’t make sense if they complaint was lodged with the site rather than the one who purchased the content.

[declanmaltman1]

Good job Fiverr. It’s a step in the right direction at least!

[misscrystal]

CS told me that we can only block buyers from ordering again if they purchased at least once from us in the past.

CS said it’s not possible to block a user from making a first purchase - they have to make a purchase, and only then you can block them from buying again.

You can’t block someone just because “you think he might do” something against you. And if he doesn’t? That’s the problem with segregation and discrimination. Would you like to be discriminated or segregated just because someone thinks you might do xxxx? I think not and I would support you desliking it.

It’s just about the same as saying you’ll not be tasting an icecream because you think you might not like it 😉 It makes no sense, don’t you think?😃 First you taste it, then you decide whether you like it or not. The same goes with blocking a new buyer.

P.S. if I use the “report” thing to block a user in Inbox, they still can make a purchase :roll_eyes:

Yes, the report on the inbox is just for blocking messaging, the one on the buyer’s/seller’s profile goes straght to the Trust & Security Team who will ckeck the report.

You can’t block someone just because “you think he might do” something against you.

But I only think that about buyers from one particular country. 😄

[woofy31]

CS told me that we can only block buyers from ordering again if they purchased at least once from us in the past.

CS said it’s not possible to block a user from making a first purchase - they have to make a purchase, and only then you can block them from buying again.

You can’t block someone just because “you think he might do” something against you. And if he doesn’t? That’s the problem with segregation and discrimination. Would you like to be discriminated or segregated just because someone thinks you might do xxxx? I think not and I would support you desliking it.

It’s just about the same as saying you’ll not be tasting an icecream because you think you might not like it 😉 It makes no sense, don’t you think?😃 First you taste it, then you decide whether you like it or not. The same goes with blocking a new buyer.

P.S. if I use the “report” thing to block a user in Inbox, they still can make a purchase :roll_eyes:

Yes, the report on the inbox is just for blocking messaging, the one on the buyer’s/seller’s profile goes straght to the Trust & Security Team who will ckeck the report.

You can’t block someone just because “you think he might do” something against you. And if he doesn’t? That’s the problem with segregation and discrimination. Would you like to be discriminated or segregated just because someone thinks you might do xxxx? I think not and I would support you desliking it.

I think you missed my point, as I need to block Inbox users from buying because:

• they can’t take “no” for an answer and get rude because of that
• I can’t understand a thing they say (communication barrier), yet they still order
• I can’t help them technically speaking yet they still order

All the above lead to unnecessary cancellations that could’ve been avoided if I was allowed to block them 😦

I wasn’t talking about discrimination, I was talking about blocking users from becoming buyers because I simply cannot help them, and who still order a month later because they forgot our previous chat.

[cyaxrex]

That wouldn’t make sense if they complaint was lodged with the site rather than the one who purchased the content.

I was just warned by someone on Reddit that this is how things roll now. I have no idea if the report is accurate. From experience, though, buyers who chargeback on orders do usually return under different usernames. In this case, I am assuming that buyer uses their new identities to lodge complaints.

[nikavoice]

But sellers are scammed by buyers into giving free work over and over with no power, now they can block the scammers.

I’ve also heard a rumor that if sellers complain directly to sources where their work is being used online (after a chargeback and after buyers have been banned by Fiverr) Fiverr still considers this off-Fiverr communication. 😦

I’ve also heard a rumor that if sellers complain directly to sources where their work is being used online (after a chargeback and after buyers have been banned by Fiverr) Fiverr still considers this off-Fiverr communication. 😦

Ugh! So, Sellers cannot fight these case themselves? That’s insanity! Every time I learn something new or hear these rumors, I feel like doing this.

Ultimately, Sellers should just roll over in the mud when it’s blatant theft? 🐷 smh

[woofy31]

I’ve also heard a rumor that if sellers complain directly to sources where their work is being used online (after a chargeback and after buyers have been banned by Fiverr) Fiverr still considers this off-Fiverr communication. 😦

Ugh! So, Sellers cannot fight these case themselves? That’s insanity! Every time I learn something new or hear these rumors, I feel like doing this.

Ultimately, Sellers should just roll over in the mud when it’s blatant theft? 🐷 smh

So now we can’t fight for our stolen work, we can’t properly respond to buyer reviews as they are kept hidden from us… I think a list of what we can do would be smaller than one on what we can’t do anymore 😦

[maitasun]

You can’t block someone just because “you think he might do” something against you. And if he doesn’t? That’s the problem with segregation and discrimination. Would you like to be discriminated or segregated just because someone thinks you might do xxxx? I think not and I would support you desliking it.

I think you missed my point, as I need to block Inbox users from buying because:

• they can’t take “no” for an answer and get rude because of that
• I can’t understand a thing they say (communication barrier), yet they still order
• I can’t help them technically speaking yet they still order

All the above lead to unnecessary cancellations that could’ve been avoided if I was allowed to block them 😦

I wasn’t talking about discrimination, I was talking about blocking users from becoming buyers because I simply cannot help them, and who still order a month later because they forgot our previous chat.

I think you missed my point, as I need to block Inbox users from buying because:

• they can’t take “no” for an answer and get rude because of that
• I can’t understand a thing they say (communication barrier), yet they still order
• I can’t help them technically speaking yet they still order

All the above lead to unnecessary cancellations that could’ve been avoided if I was allowed to block them 😦

I wasn’t talking about discrimination, I was talking about blocking users from becoming buyers because I simply cannot help them, and who still order a month later because they forgot our previous chat.

I didn’t miss your point, I already answered you

Yes, the report on the inbox is just for blocking messaging, the one on the buyer’s/seller’s profile goes straght to the Trust & Security Team who will ckeck the report.

[cyaxrex]

CS told me that we can only block buyers from ordering again if they purchased at least once from us in the past.

CS said it’s not possible to block a user from making a first purchase - they have to make a purchase, and only then you can block them from buying again.

You can’t block someone just because “you think he might do” something against you. And if he doesn’t? That’s the problem with segregation and discrimination. Would you like to be discriminated or segregated just because someone thinks you might do xxxx? I think not and I would support you desliking it.

It’s just about the same as saying you’ll not be tasting an icecream because you think you might not like it 😉 It makes no sense, don’t you think?😃 First you taste it, then you decide whether you like it or not. The same goes with blocking a new buyer.

P.S. if I use the “report” thing to block a user in Inbox, they still can make a purchase :roll_eyes:

Yes, the report on the inbox is just for blocking messaging, the one on the buyer’s/seller’s profile goes straght to the Trust & Security Team who will ckeck the report.

You can’t block someone just because “you think he might do”

This is simply not true. I have people every week send me links to TV commercials on Youtube asking if I can make something similar. I say “no, sorry.” Some buyers then let me know that they are going to order anyway and will help me by guiding me through what they want.

Other buyers ask for writing work which is simply beyond the scope of what I do. I tell them this. Then they order anyway. Then I am forced to cancel orders. If a buyer can’t take no for an answer, I now just pause gigs until I hope they have taken their madness elsewhere. This is exactly the same as blocking them. Blocking them would just be much easier.

[nikavoice]

So now we can’t fight for our stolen work, we can’t properly respond to buyer reviews as they are kept hidden from us… I think a list of what we can do would be smaller than one on what we can’t do anymore 😦 to take advantage of me. I’m a firecracker and if I’m being scammed or taken advantage of, my defense mode kicks in. :no_good_woman:t4:

[cyaxrex]

I just cannot sit back and allow some numb 💀 to take advantage of me. I’m a firecracker and if I’m being scammed or taken advantage of, my defense mode kicks in. :no_good_woman:t4:

I just cannot sit back and allow some numb 💀 to take advantage of me. I’m a firecracker and if I’m being scammed or taken advantage of, my defense mode kicks in. :no_good_woman:t4:

Bye then. I’ll miss you 👋

[maitasun]

You can’t block someone just because “you think he might do”

This is simply not true. I have people every week send me links to TV commercials on Youtube asking if I can make something similar. I say “no, sorry.” Some buyers then let me know that they are going to order anyway and will help me by guiding me through what they want.

Other buyers ask for writing work which is simply beyond the scope of what I do. I tell them this. Then they order anyway. Then I am forced to cancel orders. If a buyer can’t take no for an answer, I now just pause gigs until I hope they have taken their madness elsewhere. This is exactly the same as blocking them. Blocking them would just be much easier.

This is simply not true. I have people every week send me links to TV commercials on Youtube asking if I can make something similar. I say “no, sorry.” Some buyers then let me know that they are going to order anyway and will help me by guiding me through what they want.

Other buyers ask for writing work which is simply beyond the scope of what I do. I tell them this. Then they order anyway. Then I am forced to cancel orders. If a buyer can’t take no for an answer, I now just pause gigs until I hope they have taken their madness elsewhere. This is exactly the same as blocking them. Blocking them would just be much easier.

For this, we all need to be given the autonomy to decide whether to accept or not the orders, It has nothing to do with blocking.

[woofy31]

This is simply not true. I have people every week send me links to TV commercials on Youtube asking if I can make something similar. I say “no, sorry.” Some buyers then let me know that they are going to order anyway and will help me by guiding me through what they want.

Other buyers ask for writing work which is simply beyond the scope of what I do. I tell them this. Then they order anyway. Then I am forced to cancel orders. If a buyer can’t take no for an answer, I now just pause gigs until I hope they have taken their madness elsewhere. This is exactly the same as blocking them. Blocking them would just be much easier.

For this, we all need to be given the autonomy to decide whether to accept or not the orders, It has nothing to do with blocking.

we all need to be given the autonomy to decide whether to accept or not the orders

That’s something sellers have asked for since 2010, Fiverr clearly has no intention of ever making this happen (assuming you’re referring to a feature of accepting/rejecting an order, because right now we can’t refuse an order without an impact on our analytics)

[cyaxrex]

This is simply not true. I have people every week send me links to TV commercials on Youtube asking if I can make something similar. I say “no, sorry.” Some buyers then let me know that they are going to order anyway and will help me by guiding me through what they want.

Other buyers ask for writing work which is simply beyond the scope of what I do. I tell them this. Then they order anyway. Then I am forced to cancel orders. If a buyer can’t take no for an answer, I now just pause gigs until I hope they have taken their madness elsewhere. This is exactly the same as blocking them. Blocking them would just be much easier.

For this, we all need to be given the autonomy to decide whether to accept or not the orders, It has nothing to do with blocking.

For this, we all need to be given the autonomy to decide whether to accept or not the orders , It has nothing to do with blocking.

If this happened, I would bet that many sellers would automatically reject orders from certain entire countries. In this case, your solution could well lead to what some might interpret as outright discrimination.

[maitasun]

we all need to be given the autonomy to decide whether to accept or not the orders

That’s something sellers have asked for since 2010, Fiverr clearly has no intention of ever making this happen (assuming you’re referring to a feature of accepting/rejecting an order, because right now we can’t refuse an order without an impact on our analytics)

That’s something sellers have asked for since 2010, Fiverr clearly has no intention of ever making this happen 😦 (assuming you’re referring to a feature of accepting/rejecting an order, because right now we can’t refuse an order without an impact on our analytics)

Yes, I’m referring to accepting/rejecting orders. It should be the seller’s right to decide as it’s the seller who is running his/her own business.

I hope someday Fiverr gets to understand we all need to be independent and responsable of our business decisions.