New update: Buyers will soon be able to quallifying canceled orders...but sellers won't?

[roberthazelton]

34 minutes ago, italianspeaker said:

I'm in the VO category as well. I want just share a couple of considerations.

I think that we should always think different when we talk about selling services. It is different form selling things: if you buy a pen and that doesn't write, you can go to the shop and demonstrate the pen is not writing, and 99% times you'll get a new one working.

If you buy a service it is not so easy to define what's good and what's bad. Sometimes can be matter of taste. But of course you can leave a review, or get a second delivery. I use to offer a second delivery re-recording the script if the client is unhappy.

And, what about the reviwes like "oh fantastic pro, hreat job, more than expected! 2 stars"? lol. It happens everywhere on the net, but nobody has a way to prevent or control that kind of reviews. 

 

In the voice over world, a cancellation might happen because the quality isn't what was advertised (sound quality I mean). 

It might be because the client didn't like it and the buyer is a middle man to that. 

It might be that they slip in something to the script after a revision that you don't want to do (erotica, for example. It has happened).

There are any number of reasons well beyond your control. And if reviews didn't determine so much within Fiverr, it wouldn't be such a big deal.

And surely for someone with thousands of great orders, one or two won't matter. But smaller sellers have the potential to get smashed by this.

[mandyzines]

3 hours ago, strategist_ceo said:

I'm shy.

It is challenging to engage productively with individuals who resort to name-calling during a conversation (for civil discourse), a debate (for intellectual exchanges), or an argument (for those who lack substantive points). 

Okay. So not only can you not see my response to their review, nor do you care that there are always two sides to every story, you're also refusing to see how unlikely that photo represents them and conforms to TOS. And you choose to 'get offended' on someone's behalf for sarcasm so...you can turn up your nose and carry on ignoring everything else in the comments? You win. I'm so unworthy.

Edited June 15, 2023 by mandyzines

[newsmike]

1 hour ago, italianspeaker said:

I'm in the VO category as well. I want just share a couple of considerations.

I think that we should always think different when we talk about selling services. It is different form selling things: if you buy a pen and that doesn't write, you can go to the shop and demonstrate the pen is not writing, and 99% times you'll get a new one working.

If you buy a service it is not so easy to define what's good and what's bad. Sometimes can be matter of taste. But of course you can leave a review, or get a second delivery. I use to offer a second delivery re-recording the script if the client is unhappy.

And, what about the reviwes like "oh fantastic pro, hreat job, more than expected! 2 stars"? lol. It happens everywhere on the net, but nobody has a way to prevent or control that kind of reviews. 

 

I sell VO's I understand your point, but you are only open to these problems if you do not explain clearly what the rules are for things like asking for retakes or script changes. I never say no, but I sure do explain how much such things cost, and direct them to that right in my gigs and FAQ's 

[newsmike]

14 minutes ago, mandyzines said:

nor do you care that there are always two sides to every story,

In this entire thread, that is the single biggest take away. You nailed it on the head.  There is a cult which believes that they alone carry the absolute truth with them and anyone who dares challenge it is an infidel who needs to be silenced. Question that and they accuse you of victimizing them often in the most childish ways.

[mandyzines]

20 minutes ago, newsmike said:

In this entire thread, that is the single biggest take away. You nailed it on the head.  There is a cult which believes that they alone carry the absolute truth with them and anyone who dares challenge it is an infidel who needs to be silenced. Question that and they accuse you of victimizing them often in the most childish ways.

Questioning is awesome! Saying that something absolutely happened or is the case based on half of the information is...some word I'm having a problem coming up with. 

Although, it's a lot like listening to the talking heads on TV and thinking what comes out of their mouths are absolute, unquestionable truths.

Edited June 15, 2023 by mandyzines

[elitedesignuk]

On 6/14/2023 at 3:46 PM, newsmike said:

Yes, but we must consider others as well. You asked for fairness. That what fairness is. 

Not really is it - Fair would be equitable and this is not that.

'Fair' - by any objective definition would be a situation where the exact same set of rules applied to BOTH parties in the contract (in fact - here in the UK this would probably be illegal under the Unfair Contract Statute)

So - 'fair' would be if I, as the 'other side of the contract', was able to cancel an order because of a 'bad buyer' and leave them feedback without them having any kind of recourse.

Clearly if something is one sided it is NOT fair - however, should you wish to eloquently advocate, as to how this new feature is truly 'fair' to BOTH parties then I will most certainly be willing to listen to your argument.

[elitedesignuk]

On 6/14/2023 at 6:58 PM, donnovan86 said:

If you read the article, you'll see that first time buyers can't leave a review. So only repeat buyers can leave a review on canceled orders. I am sure they know how this measure would bring lots of potential issues.

That's not the case - it's people who are first time buyers on Fivver (never ordered before from ANYONE) - it is NOT buyers who are the first time ordering with you.....

[newsmike]

7 minutes ago, elitedesignuk said:

Clearly if something is one sided it is NOT fair - however, should you wish to eloquently advocate, as to how this new feature is truly 'fair' to BOTH parties then I will most certainly be willing to listen to your argument.

You are correct that long before we discuss how to implement fairness, we must all first agree on what that means, or the rest is pointless. Of course, this is impossible.

The most fair application of speech is that anyone on the platform is allowed to say whatever they wish, even with the resulting consequences. But as you can see, the mob hates that. Politics.

[elitedesignuk]

8 minutes ago, newsmike said:

You are correct that long before we discuss how to implement fairness, we must all first agree on what that means, or the rest is pointless. Of course, this is impossible.

The most fair application of speech is that anyone on the platform is allowed to say whatever they wish, even with the resulting consequences. But as you can see, the mob hates that. Politics.

I am in complete agreement with you - but surely your statement is counter to the argument that you have been making - that this new feature is 'fair'?   It is not as it unfairly constrains one party (by way of speech and otherwise) whilst at the same time gifting equity to the other party without cost or consequence.

Definitively 'unfair' to one party and if this were a contract governed by  UK/EU law it would be illegal.

[donnovan86]

14 minutes ago, elitedesignuk said:

That's not the case - it's people who are first time buyers on Fivver (never ordered before from ANYONE) - it is NOT buyers who are the first time ordering with you.....

Why are you quoting stuff that's more than a day old. At that time there was no clarification, it arrived hours after that... Yes, it's only people that are new to Fiverr. That being said, buyers that are also sellers can't leave a review even if they cancel, so that's a positive.

[elitedesignuk]

56 minutes ago, donnovan86 said:

Why are you quoting stuff that's more than a day old. At that time there was no clarification, it arrived hours after that... Yes, it's only people that are new to Fiverr. That being said, buyers that are also sellers can't leave a review even if they cancel, so that's a positive.

Sorry - didn't note the date on your post but I did note, as I read through the thread, that you had stated the same thing on multiple occasions.  Nonetheless please accept my apology,

What remains unclear (unless you have seen / received clarification) are the following two points;

 

1. What is 'unresponsive'?  If I am in a conversation with a client that has a live order and I answer their question and they reply with 'Thanks' - should I reply again to ensure that I am the LAST person in the thread?  If not what is this 24 hour 'response' rule?

2. It's stated something along the lines of; 'A buyer can leave a cancelled review if there has been substantial communication' - so Buyer just places an order and fails to complete the requirements properly (happens all the time) - I then communicate with them 'substantially' to determine what is needed for the project.  At the end of those substantial comms it's determined that I don't really do what they want or they can't provide what I need so we agree to cancel - by way of the fact that I gave a GREAT customer experience and tried my best to walk them through the process, determining what they need - can they now leave me a 'review'? (Due to the substantial communication)

Any light you or anyone else can cast upon these two opaque rules would be received with my utmost appreciation.

[shahidmalla1337]

From my perspective, I strongly disagree with the recent modifications made to Fiverr concerning canceled orders. The updated terms now permit buyers to post public reviews on canceled orders, which is unjust and harmful to sellers. Freelancers already encounter various difficulties, such as buyers trying to take advantage of them for extra work, issuing threats if additional work is not provided for free, leaving negative feedback, and even damaging sellers' profiles. With the inclusion of this unfavorable feature, Fiverr, please reconsider this change! https://www.fiverr.com/support/articles/360049982353-Reviews-and-ratings?segment=buyer

What are your thoughts on this feature? Do you believe it is helpful for sellers in any way? Additionally, how do you think it will impact sellers' profiles?

 

 

[newsmike]

24 minutes ago, shahidmalla1337 said:

which is unjust and harmful to sellers.

Displaying an honest number of the seller's cancellations is unfair?  The buyer deserves to know who cancels a lot of orders. 

[newsmike]

1 minute ago, shahidmalla1337 said:

I understand your perspective, but allow me to present an alternative viewpoint. While it may seem fair to display an honest number of cancellations to inform buyers, there are valid reasons why publicly reviewing canceled orders may not be beneficial for sellers. Here are a few points to consider:

1. Incomplete Picture: Publicly reviewing canceled orders does not provide the full context of why an order was canceled. There could be various legitimate reasons for cancellation, such as mutually agreed-upon modifications, technical difficulties, or misunderstandings between the buyer and seller. Displaying canceled orders without any explanation may create a misleading impression of the seller's abilities or professionalism.

2. Unfair Impact on Sellers: Negative reviews on canceled orders can have a disproportionate impact on sellers' profiles and overall reputation. It's important to acknowledge that sellers often invest time and effort into delivering high-quality work, but circumstances may occasionally lead to order cancellations. Publicly displaying negative reviews for canceled orders could unfairly tarnish a seller's reputation, even if they consistently deliver excellent results on other projects.

3. Encouraging Abusive Behavior: Allowing public reviews on canceled orders could potentially encourage malicious buyers to exploit the system. Some buyers may deliberately initiate orders they have no intention of completing, solely to leave negative reviews. This kind of behavior can harm sellers, discourage their productivity, and create an environment of mistrust and unfairness.

4. Focus on Successful Orders: Fiverr is a platform that aims to facilitate successful transactions between buyers and sellers. By emphasizing positive interactions and completed orders, both parties can benefit from constructive feedback and build a reliable reputation. Publicly reviewing canceled orders may divert attention from the successful collaborations and impact the overall trust and confidence within the Fiverr community.

I agree. But none of these are justification to hide the data from the buyers. Even with the problems that may arise, there is no good argument for making sellers with lots of cancellations appear perfect because data is being withheld. The lesser of 2 evils. 

[visualstudios]

Don't argue with chat gpt, mike...

[shahidmalla1337]

31 minutes ago, newsmike said:

I agree. But none of these are justification to hide the data from the buyers. Even with the problems that may arise, there is no good argument for making sellers with lots of cancellations appear perfect because data is being withheld. The lesser of 2 evils. 

I understand the importance of data visibility, but I disagree with allowing buyers to publicly review canceled orders. If a buyer demands additional work without compensation and the seller chooses to cancel the order, it is unfair for the buyer to leave negative reviews. Fiverr's response addresses some situations, but the issue of unjust cancellations due to unreasonable buyer demands remains unresolved. Implementing a system for sellers to dispute unjust cancellations privately would create a fairer environment for all parties involved.


reply from fiverr: Hi Shahid, we understand you’re concerned about the new review policy. Buyers won't be eligible to leave reviews in cases where they were not communicating, or purchased by mistake

Edited June 16, 2023 by shahidmalla1337

[shahidmalla1337]

15 minutes ago, visualstudios said:

Don't argue with chat gpt, mike...

Wow, what a comment! Thanks for the disrespect. But hey, what's the problem with using technology? 

[visualstudios]

7 minutes ago, shahidmalla1337 said:

Thanks for the disrespect. But hey, what's the problem with using technology? 

There's no problem with using technology. The problem is that on a forum I want to talk to real people using their own words, and speaking their own thoughts. If I wanted to speak to chat gpt, that's what I'd do. It's actually disrespectful for everyone who takes the time to actually write their own posts to get a reply that was written by a bot.

Also, if you admit that your post was indeed written using chat gpt (and it obviously was, given the structure - that 4 point list alone is evident, not to mention the formula of "I understand your perspective, but... etc.", that's chatgpt for you), then there was no disrespect in what I said, it was factual. If you don't... I'll find that very hard to believe.

 

Edited June 16, 2023 by visualstudios

[tareque_graphic]

I don't like these features.

[newsmike]

12 minutes ago, shahidmalla1337 said:

If a buyer demands additional work without compensation and the seller chooses to cancel the order, it is unfair for the buyer to leave negative reviews. Fiverr's response addresses some situations, but the issue of unjust cancellations due to unreasonable buyer demands remains unresolved. Implementing a system for sellers to dispute unjust cancellations privately would create a fairer environment for all parties involved.

What about when it is because the seller delivered bad or stolen work?  In these conversations, no one is addressing when it is the seller's fault. Fiver has far more fake sellers than it does bad buyers. 

[visualstudios]

Just now, newsmike said:

What about when it is because the seller delivered bad or stolen work?

Because in that case it's warranted, and nobody has a problem with it. Of course people will focus on the system's downsides, nobody is gonna complain about the upside.

[newsmike]

Just now, visualstudios said:

Because in that case it's warranted, and nobody has a problem with it. Of course people will focus on the system's downsides, nobody is gonna complain about the upside.

I know, but Fiverr's problem is a massive amount of fraudulent sellers, So far hundreds of complaints and every one about "bad buyers".  I think I am literally the only one who has even acknowledged that sellers can contribute to cancelled orders. It is clear who is mad about this change and obvious why. 

[visualstudios]

2 minutes ago, newsmike said:

I think I am literally the only one who has even acknowledged that sellers can contribute to cancelled orders.

You're talking to me lol, you seriously think I don't acknowledge that? That's a given. This boils down to an ethics issue, in the end. Is it worth to jail an innocent if that means 99 criminals go to jail? Or is it better to keep the 99 criminals out, if that means the innocent is also free? There's no good answer to this. People have argued back and forth on this point for millennia. And this is the same. Almost surely some people will be negatively impacted and didn't deserve to, even if the vast majority are, indeed, bad sellers.

Edited June 16, 2023 by visualstudios

[newsmike]

2 minutes ago, visualstudios said:

You're talking to me lol, you seriously think I don't acknowledge that?

No, you were excluded.  I was referencing the panicked meksells. But there is no way that "bad buyers" outweigh the scam sellers, you know that by forum traffic alone. I do not believe that it is ethical to make sellers with cancellations appear otherwise. In fact it is dishonest itself. Buyers deserve honest facts to make their decisions upon.

Edited June 16, 2023 by newsmike

[visualstudios]

My point was the just paying for the sinner. From a utilitarian perspective, it may well be worth to jail the innocent, if that means you catch all the criminals. Crime will go down. From a personal liberty perspective... that's problematic. There's no good, definitive answer.