Bribing Buyers?

[sydneymorgan]

I ordered an article yesterday from a seemingly trusted seller. I wasn’t pleased with the work so I left a 3-star review, which I thought was fair considering the seller has pretty poor communication (silence until delivery, which used an automated message) and the writing itself was sub-par (bad English, lots of repeated info). Anyway, I just got this message…

[Guest magy1808]

Yeah, there is a lot of seller like this, they accept or bid for bunch of a orders, then do poor job, then offer more for new review…and soon enough you have level 2 seller with 1000 of reviews with an actually poor designing or some other abilities. Not everyone are like that, but there are people (sellers) like that, not just on Fiverr, on other freelancing sites too. For you and for other buyers the best advice is to actually check portfolio and read all reviews seller has, by that you can judge is that person someone you can or can not work with, also before ordering a GIG, send seller a message in inbox, and talk with them about work you need to get done, by their interest and questions you will know is the person qualified to do work or not. I am sorry you had a bad experience here, hope it wont pull you away from Fiverr. 🙂

[sincere18]

Just ignore it. Or write back,

thank you very much for your offer, however I am not interested at this time.

And if they contact you again, just contact customer service.

[emasonwrites]

I don’t see this as “bribing” so much as “trying to make things right.” For example, if you go to a restaurant and you find a hair in your soup, they offer you something else off of the menu for free.

[sydneymorgan]

Reply to @emasonwrites: I understand that, but I think this is a bit different. She’s asking me to change my review to reflect a rating I don’t think she deserves in exchange for more work of the same quality.

She also demanded 5-star feedback upon delivery, which I know is against TOS.

[sincere18]

Reply to @sydneymorgan: yes, I know what she is offering and you are simply not interested in a free work for changing your rating.

Or just ignore the message. You do not have to write her back.

[sincere18]

Reply to @emasonwrites: Yes, but they are not offering to fix the actual article. In a restaurant if they screw up your order, you asked for no mushrooms and they bring it to you with mushrooms they take it back and redo the order. This seller is not offering to do that. If they were they would have offered to do a revise first to make the situation right, asked the buyer how they can fix the situation.

[zdesignz]

I can understand why someone might do this, getting solid reviews is the most important thing on fiver it seems. Better to just provide a quality service in the first place though.

[self-promotion removed]

[emasonwrites]

Reply to @sincere18: My analogy doesn’t have anything to do with trying to fix the original article–I was talking about attempting to add value in return for a better review. They don’t take the soup away, pluck the hair out of it, and bring it back to you (well, some restaurants might, but that’s not the point), they bring you something else. The seller was offering to double the value of what she delivered–same quality, just more of it–in the hopes that would be enough for a five-star rating. It’s still not the same thing as bribery.

@sydneymorgan: Asking for a five-star review isn’t against the TOS. It’s not good business practice, in my opinion, but unless she refused the deliver the goods until you’d given her a five-star review, I’m not sure where she would have violated TOS.

[sincere18]

Reply to @emasonwrites: yse, I understand that is exactly it, the sellers is trying to deliver the same quality but more of it. But if the quality is horrible to begin with, why would the buyer want that? It isn’t a special thing a restaurant would do to compensate a customer to keep them happy. They don’t just say, there is a hair in your soup, well, let me bring you two bowls of soup to make up for it.

I actually do see this as a bribe because the SEller didn’t ask what they can do to fix it first. If they did that, then I can understand. It would be like the restaurant saying, I’m so sorry about your soup let me fix that for you would you like a salad instead, and then for your inconvience I will give you dessert for free.

[steveeyes]

I see nothing wrong with a seller trying. Goodness, don’t make such a big deal out of it. Be at least a little understanding that the seller is at least trying, instead of slamming him for it.

[emasonwrites]

Reply to @sincere18: I’m not trying to defend this seller, I’m just saying, there’s a big difference between offering someone additional value for free, which businesses do all of the time when their customers are unhappy, and bribing someone.

[willpower_hk]

Reply to @sydneymorgan:
Demanding 5-star feedback upon delivery is NOT against TOS.
Giving bonus for 5-star feedback is NOT against TOS.
Withholding delivery for 5-star feedback, however, IS against TOS.

I agree with @steveeyes 's reply below that it’s not such a big deal. You could just forget it and maintain the 3-star review, or try to request a refund if it deviates too much from the quality mentioned in the gig description.

[sincere18]

Reply to @emasonwrites: I completely agree, but when business offers something of an additional value for free, they don’t ask the customer to do something first in order to get it. They are apologizing and trying to make right whatever the problem is, that’s all.

[fastcopywriter]

sydneymorgan said: the seller has pretty poor communication (silence until delivery, which used an automated message)

Most sellers don’t communicate unless they have questions, it’s very annoying to communicate and continue dealing with the message bombardment. Now if this guy did bad work, you could have requested a modification or demand a refund. But don’t give him 3-stars just because he didn’t kiss your butt. Our job is to do the job, not to treat you like you’re the master and we’re the slave.

[sydneymorgan]

Reply to @fastcopywriter: As a seller I totally understand that, but I had no idea if she had even gotten my order, as I’ve had many writers not say anything until the day of delivery, and then cancel last minute.

She ended up refunded anyway, I felt 3-stars was fair for the very poor quality work which I believe was spun after running it through copyscape.

[fastcopywriter]

Reply to @sydneymorgan: That’s a good point, I’ve been screwed by sellers like that.

So she refunded to eliminate your 3-star review? Interesting. Fiverr CS told me that to remove a review, you have to ask the buyer to do that for you. Refunds don’t automatically remove them anymore. I don’t know why, I think if the buyer gets his money back, the review should go away.

[sydneymorgan]

Reply to @fastcopywriter: She had messaged after I declined her “free article” offer and said she’d refund if I removed my feedback, I thought it did it automatically anyways so I figured it wouldn’t matter in the end.

When did they change that?

It seems unfair that sellers have to lose money, waste time, and keep bad feedback. Especially with an influx of refund-happy buyers lately! Sometimes I wonder about the changes they make…

Anyway, thanks for your response 🙂

[fastcopywriter]

Reply to @sydneymorgan: Yeah, you have to remove the feedback yourself. You go to buying and manage orders. However, if a seller has replied your review, then he needs to remove that reply, otherwise you can’t do anything.

Either way, refunds are reputation protectors. Consider this example, most people that hire me to write Facebook ads love my work, but every once in a while, I get a difficult client. So this guy asks for a revision, and I make it. Then he asks for another revision. That’s when I refund. It makes me angry, I already wasted time doing a revision, but he has me by the balls. If he doesn’t like my work again, he’ll demand either another revision or will give me 1-3 stars or demand a refund.

That’s why I try to anticipate my buyers as much as possible. It saves time.

[julipalmer7]

Reply to @emasonwrites: that’s a good one.