smashradio

Yes, I saw that yesterday. But honestly, this change doesn't affect me that much, if at all. I've only had a few cancellations in nine years. I checked, and I have a cancellation rate (total over nine years on Fiverr) of 1,76% of orders, none of them being because I went unresponsive or didn't deliver a satisfactory result. I'm not too worried about this change affecting me, and if I ever get a negative review because I do such a bad job of communicating with a client or delivering something to their satisfaction, well, then I deserve that review and will apologize in my response to it.

The forum can be bad for your health.

Perhaps not, but in that mix, you'll find a lot of people sharing space at different price points. By removing the bottom tier, you increase the perceived value of your gigs. I'm not saying it would affect you greatly, but a lot of actual professionals working the mid-tier market would notice a huge change if we got rid of meksells. But good lord. Six pages of posts in one hour! I need to get some work done. Got a 4000-word script that needs to be ready by tomorrow evening. 😅

Of course you do. And I'm not saying that's the wrong approach, I'm saying that they might not be as inclined to spend as much, when the offer next to you is so much cheaper. That's basic psychology.

Of course they are. If I search for video editors and see your videos next to someone charging 100, and I'm not already a video pro, I might not even see the difference in your 720p videos with its 64kbps tape-quality audio. I'd see the price tag, loud and clear, and if I was looking for value, I might go for the cheaper option, even if your product is objectively better, and even if I have the budget to go with your 600-dollar gig instead. Buyers are very sensitive to the value difference - so if I can get a very good video for 100 and an extremely good video for 600, there is something to be said for diminished return. Besides that, it means you have to share space with amateurs, which affects the platform's reputation, as you said, leading to fewer high-end buyers willing to try Fiverr, because it's known for low-quality value services.

Indeed. Which is why I want the bloody paywall, now. Imagine how many "exparts" would disappear overnight. I can practically taste the improvement to the platform.

Of course, but that's true everywhere. If I open up clothing store number 200 at the local mall, ten years after the other stores opened up, I can't possible expect to have the same outcome or opportunities as the well-established people who got a ten-year head start. Nor should I be able to.

I get that. Just used it as an example since you mentioned it, but it applies to everything—even rules. I've proven to Fiverr that I can be trusted and that I'm a professional. I've worked hard to do so. A perk is access to better and faster support, which might change the outcome for me, compared to a new seller with no track record and trust built up. This is why doing things the right way initially is so important. As you said, we were all new once and got to where we are because we did things right—action, reaction, cause, and effect.

So, if you have worked your ass off to become better than others, shouldn't you have access to better things? That's what the perks are there for. To reward those who deserve it.

But wouldn't anything else than selling the same for the same price be unfair? If so, why not?

fair [fɛː] ADJECTIVE treating people equally without favouritism or discrimination: "the group has achieved fair and equal representation for all its members" · "a fairer distribution of wealth"

The opportunity is to work your way up on the platform. You also have the opportunity to invest in your business by getting Seller Plus. I can't buy a Ferrari at the moment, but I know people who can. They have that opportunity. I don't. But we both have the opportunity to work hard and smart and if I worked as hard or smart as they did, I might too afford the Ferrari.

Trust is also a perk earned over time. "Hey, Pedro. I want a video from you. I want to pay 50 dollars. It's all I can afford. But I want the same product as those who can pay 600. It doesn't sit right with me that life can be unfair for those who don't have it." Would you take it or laugh at me?

And we have spent years becoming successful. Do you just want to give away the perks we've worked hard to achieve? I'm all for equal opportunities. However, I'm not for equality of outcome. You have to deserve the perks you get in life.

Indeed. They should offer it to everyone. But everyone who works here should have to pay to sell. Problem solved, and we would get rid of 180.000 logo designers who are "canva exparts".

This is why Seller Plus should change its name to just "Seller" and become obligatory.

Besides, the insights we get via Seller Plus are, in my opinion, more than enough to let us know who to work with. I've only checked out a buyer's reviews if the insights have given me a reason to doubt their integrity in the first place.

Perhaps you're right, and the buyer reviews should go out the door. If we're going to the approach from the brick-and-mortar examples in this (and other) threads, businesses can't review clients, they can only respond to reviews from clients.

I see your point, but then again, that retaliation stems from their final experience with the seller. It's part of the buying experience they had. It doesn't become invalid just because the order says "complete" in the seller's dashboard.

True. We're probably not going to be able to change much with our discussions and ramblings. But like you said, you think it's funny. Besides, having a conversation about it can raise interesting questions. I've changed my mind about things more times than I can count based on intelligent conversation. I enjoy being proven wrong. It means I've learned something. Good point. But given that we're in a business environment, we are responsible for being the grownups, even when our clients act like toddlers. We can't act like that TikTok mom I saw the other day, who sat down screaming next to her kid in an effort to make the kid understand how stupid the behavior was.

Yes, I do. Of course, in an ideal world, all reviews should be honest. Yes, of course, they are venting. And that's up to them, isn't it? They run the risk of not getting to work with some of us if they leave a lot of unfair negative reviews. At least that's true for those of us smart enough to vet our buyers.

I think public reviews should be visible but taken out of the BSR calculations entirely. As @newsmike, I fully support the right for everyone to say whatever the hell they way. Of course, that might have consequences, because if you constantly leave negative reviews for everyone who refuses to work for free, the "rating given" stat won't inspire talented people to work with them in the future. That's their risk.

In my opinion - yes, because it gives us the option to leave a negative review. There could come a time when my experience was so bad that I felt the benefits would outweigh the risks. I don't think that will ever happen, but I like having the option. I know several sellers who frequently take advantage of that option, and that's entirely within their prerogative. We each operate our businesses as we feel is best. The seller made a choice, which consequently came back to haunt him. Hopefully, this will serve as a cautionary tale about the risks involved with venting in public.

As a business professional, I make it a point never to trash-talk my clients in public, regardless of their imbecility. Publicly airing out grievances can harm your business and deter others from working with you. It might even cause undesirable repercussions, like... Let's see... A buyer taking revenge for your lacking ability to maintain that professionalism. And let's be brutally honest, the OP practically invited the fallout. By choosing not to air dirty laundry and shut up about client woes, you could have avoided this debacle. This isn't about the right to modify a review. It’s about whether you want to champion unprofessionalism. Even if your client is the biggest ass you've ever met, man up, display a modicum of professionalism, zip it, and move on to the next client. You pocketed the money and got a nice review. Running one's mouth in public is not going to do you any favors. Yes, it might warn off other sellers, but your job is not to be other sellers guardian angel, especially not when it can come back to bite you in the butt. We can go on discussing if a buyer should be able to edit their review or not all day long, but at the end of the day, a buyer should have every right to let their review reflect the experience they had - good or bad, just as you're free to leave them a one-star in return. Just know that doing so can open up the door to heaps of problems. Which is why I simply avoid it.

I would suggest searching for sellers who could be relevant instead of using Briefs. It's mostly irrelevant for us as sellers, too. Perhaps you could find relevant sellers by finding people who possess the required skills but don't necessarily offer that specific service. I once used a music video editor to make a pizza commercial. 🤣