Update: Addressing new level system questions and feedback

[Alex.M]

21 hours ago, visualstudios said:

Yes - refuse clients.

I do refuse some clients... however, refusing clients won't bring you money 

[visualstudios]

Just now, Alex.M said:

I do refuse some clients... however, refusing clients won't bring you money 

True. I said no to a lot of money plenty of times. The risk is not worth it. I lose, Fiverr loses. Oh well - if they wanted to make more money with my commissions, make it less risky for me. I'm willing to take almost anyone as a client if I'm dealing with them directly - they pay upfront, I do the work, if they don't like it, that's their problem. It's how businesses work in real life - sometimes you pay for something and you don't like it - and you don't get to destroy the business over it.

But here? No, thanks.

[voicedbyken]

1 minute ago, Alex.M said:

I do refuse some clients... however, refusing clients won't bring you money 

Last few days I've been getting shady buyers who put 100-words but give 300+ word scripts, and refused offers to adjust for the additional words. Ask for revisions after extending the delivery for 5 days and then come to me with new script for the revision with requests for adding music, etc at no additional charge. Then leave a subpar rating or none at all - which I'm certain they gave me a poor private review. I now have all gigs set for "Order by Request". On top of that, I've been hit with the first scammer I've seen for 3 years. This scammer clicked on my promoted gig costing me money - they were pretending to be CS telling me I need to give them my personal information and login otherwise my account would be locked. I reported and they were removed, but I was still charged for the click. All this happening during the same period of this update is not a coincidence.

[katemcgill]

On 2/15/2024 at 3:35 PM, Kesha said:

Hi @carminesannino! I would love to help clarify this for you. This metric focuses less on your language proficiency and more on your professionalism. To excel in this category, try to always be as polite, responsive, and communicative as possible with your buyers. You can read more about each key area, what it takes into account and tips on how to improve in this article here. Also, we recently did a webinar addressing the best practices of order communication. You can check out the notes here or watch the replay here. Lastly, this evaluation is not dictated by an AI. That information is not correct. 

Not ONCE have I ever been impolite, unprofessional, unkind or unresponsive in my whole career on Fiverr. Not once. There are times I'm desperate to stand up for myself when someone's rude or short or demanding, but I remain extremely professional. Yet I have 'room for growth' in that area. I literally have no idea what else I could do. I pride myself on my communication with my clients; it's the one thing (aside from my actual profession) that I'm good at. I go above and beyond every time!

This whole new system has made me lose so much faith in Fiverr. It feels like you guys just care about the buyers. It's always the buyer over the seller.

[zerlina84]

5 minutes ago, visualstudios said:

It's how businesses work in real life - sometimes you pay for something and you don't like it - and you don't get to destroy the business over it.

I mean, what’s your solution? We can refuse the cancellation forever until they give up but then we have to deal with a bad review. But that’s impossible to avoid, or are you suggesting getting rid of all reviews? That’s impossible, that’s their whole business model.

if you’re talking about those orders that are cancelled by CS when the buyers complain to them, I completely agree with you. Orders should NEVER be cancelled, no matter what, without our agreement. But in terms of how the system is designed, I don’t think there’s much to be done

Edited February 17 by zerlina84

[visualstudios]

3 minutes ago, zerlina84 said:

But that’s impossible to avoid, or are you suggesting getting rid of all reviews? That’s impossible, that’s their whole business model.

I'm suggesting giving power back to serious sellers. Pro sellers should be able to contest reviews, when they're patently false. There should be a mediation service, where a third party who actually understands the vertical, looks into the order, and sees if it was delivered according to what was agreed or not. If it was, remove any review aimed simply at screwing the seller over.

If buyer asks for X, and I deliver X, and the buyer leaves a 1 star review, that should be removed. It's misleading. The buyer is wrong. End of.

Edited February 17 by visualstudios

[terrygrantvo]

1 minute ago, visualstudios said:

There should be a mediation service, where someone who actually understands the vertical, looks into the order, and sees if it was delivered according to what was agreed or not.

Whoa whoa - what is this, a professional freelancing website? C'mon man...

[emmaki]

It's true, I'd take on a lot more work if I felt it was safer. As it is, I currently have to go through a practical FBI profiling process just to make sure someone is "safe" enough to work with.

It's ludicrous, because Fiverr's own policies and processes are putting huge barriers between sellers and buyers who could make a good fit (and consequentially, everyone would make money - buyer from ROI, seller from earnings, and Fiverr from commissions).

But instead, due to the way that Fiverr has hyperfocused its focus on automation and AI systems to regulate a vast marketplace the cheap way rather than focus on the buyers and sellers who are abusing the platform, it chooses to treat everyone per the behavior of the lowest common denominator. 

That makes everyone poorer and creates a completely unnecessary atmosphere or fear, paranoia, and distrust. How can they not see this? How can they say they are listening if they can't hear the almost universal level of outrage about this dreadful update? 

How can they just stand in the shadows, silent and watching? Here is a nice picture of the Roman Emperor Nero fiddling as Rome burns. No particular reason. I just like the picture. 

[donnovan86]

10 minutes ago, virgoca said:

but I don't consider it to be an ethical workaround.

Why wouldn't it be ethical though? They offer a service, I pay for it and reap the benefits. Seems fine to me. 

Maybe you refer to that feature being taken away. The problem is that they are doing things retroactively. So a bad review from a dude that liked my work yet went to bed at 1 AM and left me a 1 star review accidentally is all of a sudden damaging my reputation, same with extensions being a problem, or revisions.. Those were not an issue in the past. Yet all of a sudden they are.

I also get it why they are doing it. I tried to buy things on the platform as well and most sellers are level 2, with 5 stars or 4.9 stars at least. Try to buy something without spending a LOT of time going through sellers, and you also run into the problem of hiring someone that curates their reviews, cancels orders and so on. There were a lot of buyers complaining on the platform, so I see why they did this, it started with reviews for canceled orders, a new review system and the level system.

Obviously some people get hit more, others less so. That being said, we are not dealing with the monthly evaluation, and if our stats are lowered a little, we are getting enough time to get back on track. 

I was fortunate to see this leveling system in January and I remember saying to people that were unhappy with the review system that this new level system would bring even more outrage. And behold, 20+ pages of people raging and being unhappy. 

I had a post limit for some reason, so I couldn't write or interact that much, or as much as I usually do.  I just took a step back these past few days. In my case, I will just focus on my work and share my ideas during a meeting with someone from Fiverr, if I can. I hope any issues like CS-canceled orders damaging the success score get fixed, I assume they will. At the end of the day, considering the work put into this, I would be shocked to see Fiverr removing this leveling system. 

In some ways, it's better because it shows the stuff damaging our account or gig in the background. Until now, we had no idea, but now we know which gigs receive a bad private review, or at least we have an idea. I think I was the first asking for a public success score/buyer satisfaction rate score, so we can at least see where we stand. Because last year I was in the back of search results, without knowing what was wrong. I only had very good reviews, yet clearly some buyers left random reviews, maybe without even knowing that damages me in any way. 

I 

[emmaki]

4 minutes ago, visualstudios said:

If buyer asks for X, and I deliver X, and the buyer leaves a 1 star review, that should be removed. It's misleading. The buyer is wrong. End of.

Fiverr: 

[visualstudios]

 

[zerlina84]

4 minutes ago, visualstudios said:

If buyer asks for X, and I deliver X, and the buyer leaves a 1 star review, that should be removed. It's misleading. The buyer is wrong. End of.

I see. Yeah, I agree. Their whole REVIEWS ARE UNTOUCHABLE!!! thing doesn’t make sense when we are talking about people’s livelihoods. I think even Google Reviews can be removed when deemed unfair. 

[ahunyady]

7 minutes ago, visualstudios said:

I'm suggesting giving power back to serious sellers. Pro sellers should be able to contest reviews, when they're patently false. There should be a mediation service, where someone who actually understands the vertical, looks into the order, and sees if it was delivered according to what was agreed or not. If it was, remove any review aimed simply at screwing the seller over.

Not sure why only Pro sellers should be able to contest reviews. Fiverr also seems to be removing our responses to negative reviews. If a seller gives you a bad review and you reply telling the world what actually went down in the order, Fiverr removes that. It’s like Fiverr is letting monkeys make the policy decisions... then firing the monkeys and having ChatGPT do it.

Edited February 17 by ahunyady

[visualstudios]

But seriously - not even a week ago, I simply said no to a $2500 order, because I wasn't 100% confident it would have 0 hiccups. They were pressed on time, they didn't go with anyone else.

Fiverr lost $500 + fees. On one order.

[visualstudios]

2 minutes ago, ahunyady said:

Not sure why only Pro sellers should be able to contest reviews.

Because it's a numbers game. This will cost money. Can't have this apply to millions of sellers, it's just impossible. It makes sense to have this apply to people who have already been vetted as serious.

I suppose this could apply to order value instead, only for orders above $1000, for example. But obviously you can't have mediators on $5 orders, that makes no sense.

Edited February 17 by visualstudios

[emmaki]

If you think about it, Fiverr sellers are the guard, because we've all taken an arrow to the knee from Fiverr. 

But then who was phone? 

[ahunyady]

Just now, visualstudios said:

Because it's a numbers game. This will cost money. Can't have this apply to millions of sellers, it's just impossible. 

I suppose this could apply to order value instead, only for orders above $1000, for example. But obviously you can't have mediators on $5 orders, that makes no sense.

That doesn’t make sense either as a $5 review has the same weight as a $2500 review.

[emmaki]

I think UW's mediation system could work here with some tweaks. It's not for everyone, but it would monetize disputes, which isn't a bad thing for Fiverr. 

Besides, who will really believe them when they talk about the sanctity of feedback after this whole launch.... 

[visualstudios]

2 minutes ago, ahunyady said:

That doesn’t make sense either as a $5 review has the same weight as a $2500 review.

That's not the point. The point is that you can't justify spending money on vetting a $5 order. It makes no financial sense. Those orders are worthless. It makes sense for Fiverr to spend human resources on a $2500 order - they're making $500+ fees on it, they can pay for it and still be in profit. They can't spend any human resources on a $5 order - they'd run at a loss.

Edited February 17 by visualstudios

[virgoca]

2 minutes ago, donnovan86 said:

Why wouldn't it be ethical though? They offer a service, I pay for it and reap the benefits. Seems fine to me. 

 

I don’t think I even need to justify why being unjustly demoted, taken features you’ve become dependent on away, and being punished for previously meaningless things, while also being ignored by customer service when you demand an explanation and evidence of your alleged wrongdoing, just to be met with “hey, if you don’t like it you can always give me money and get those back, some of that sweet… delicious money…” is unethical. If you, or Fiverr for that matter, can’t see how manipulative, abusive and money hungry that looks, then I’m afraid this platform is gone far worse than I thought.

[emmaki]

Not if you monetize them! 

[donnovan86]

5 minutes ago, visualstudios said:

Pro sellers should be able to contest reviews, when they're patently false.

Everyone should be allowed to contest reviews. Having bias towards any seller category isn't exactly fair. 

The idea of having a mediation service is great, but I doubt it will ever happen. More people need to be hired, and even then, you would have bias from the mediator. They might go with the wrong side, even if you are right, just because they consider the buyer to be right in that situation. Even if you present evidence.

7 minutes ago, visualstudios said:

If buyer asks for X, and I deliver X, and the buyer leaves a 1 star review, that should be removed. It's misleading. The buyer is wrong. End of.

It is misleading, but if the buyer has all the power, I doubt anything changes. Since buyers are the ones paying for services, Fiverr wants them to come back and order more. I think that's why they made these rather agressive changes to the platform, so they can remove those bad weeds and meksells, as you call them. 

There are many great ideas/suggestions in this topic, but I am pretty sure this is the final form for the leveling and review system, at least for a while. They might end up making some changes, like extending the demotion period so people have more time to recover. Realistically though, I think this is the system we will be dealing with going forward, at least for a couple of years. U*work also tracks people's previous performance for the past few years too, so I was expecting them to do the same. I did not expect Fiverr to go for the lifetime approach, because long term sellers are the ones affected the most here. 

[charlsmcfarlane]

1 minute ago, visualstudios said:

Because it's a numbers game. This will cost money. Can't have this apply to millions of sellers, it's just impossible. 

They could employ a system that incentivises sellers to really consider if the buyer’s review is valid before getting support involved. I mean, it sounds like bringing support into the fray now damages seller’s stats, so they could make it so that frivolous use of a review contest system could damage the seller’s stats. Conversely, contesting an objectively incorrect review should then not affect that seller’s stats.

[donnovan86]

Just now, virgoca said:

If you, or Fiverr for that matter, can’t see how manipulative, abusive and money hungry that looks, then I’m afraid this platform is gone far worse than I thought.

Well they gave you that title based on your ratings, and they are also removing it based on your ratings. I don't really see the issue. The fact they are tracking way more things is what leads to your demotion, most likely. The lack of transparency is the issue, but then again that's why Fiverr relies on private reviews, because that's the only clear way a buyer can be very honest and not be judged or even harassed by a seller. 

I have been a seller plus subscriber since the first 200 people and got a very good deal, so I've stayed with the program ever since. That's why I said it's a good alternative. I hope they analyze every TRS demotion case manually, because I can tell you for a fact, getting that title back is very hard, if not impossible in most cases. However, if data shows you had bad performance...  it's hard to argue with that. I hope they solve the CS cancellations being taken into account and other things like that, so they won't be as damaging. 

[emmaki]

I also have the first 200 people SP program discount! I sometimes wonder how long that will last before it is swiped away to pinch at those (relative) pennies....