Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by moikchap

  1. Fiverr gave me a cartoon by default.
  2. How does someone know a bad buyer when looking at their buyer profile? A lot of people are going to hesitate to put negatives in a review in case they miss out on future work. I assume if a buyer profile just says "Outstanding experience!" over and over, there's possibly nothing good to say about that buyer and maybe stay away from them.
  3. I believe it's this section at the end of Ownership: "Furthermore, users (both Buyers and Sellers) agree that unless they explicitly indicate otherwise, the content users voluntarily create/upload to Fiverr, including Gig texts, photos, videos, usernames, user photos, user videos and any other information, including the display of delivered work, may be used by Fiverr for no consideration for marketing and/or other purposes." Not sure how to "indicate otherwise". Edit: Might mean the checkbox buyer's have to include the delivery or not.
  4. It's gettin' personal guys. Let's get back to the brass tacks of who owns what parts of the delivered items. https://www.fiverr.com/terms_of_service#ownership In the final paragraph of the Ownership section: "and the Seller waives any and all moral rights therein" I dunno about everywhere, but in Canada at least, it is an option for an Author to waive their moral rights. https://www.heerlaw.com/moral-rights-copyright-law "Moral rights can, however, be waived in whole or in part at the discretion of the author who holds the rights. This waiver will extend to all entities licensed or otherwise permitted to use the copyrighted work. Once moral rights are waived, they cannot be reacquired by the author." By putting it into the ToS, and an artist agreeing, then by promissory estoppel, a buyer can argue they have the option to decline attribution or portfolio posting by the artist. I'm not a lawyer, so I can't guarantee that's how it would go, but it would probably be easy to get help from Fiverr's lawyers else the sweater starts coming undone.
  5. Would the "right of portfolio display" and "right of attribution" be a "moral right", in legal terms?
  6. In my opinion, this is actually a really well done gig. I was expecting to see something to point out, but really I don't see anything that matters a lot. There is a variety of keywords in the title to catch a variety of searches for this type of service, you're in the category a searcher would use, you're at the bottom price so a searcher is likely to try you near the first, you include commercial use and source image without an extra tax. If I was searching for photo editing, I expect I would be able to find you, and then I would likely pick you. The only thing I can think is that your main image may not be eye-catching enough. Your second image, with the dresses, may be a better default image than the living room. The living room doesn't show an obvious difference, whereas the one with the dresses has more contrast and more variety.
  7. That's the exact opposite of what the support page says. https://www.fiverr.com/support/articles/360011569298-For-Commercial-Use-license-details
  8. Going to agree on the image. When the image is shrunk down to the size that shows in search results, text at that size and density may be hard to read. It might be good to treat a gig image like a billboard on the highway. It needs to convey the selling point while someone is whipping by at 110kmph and not directly looking at it. I know in App Icon design there's a thing like having a face draws the eye, which is why so many games have the "screaming man face" style. I don't know if that would fully work here, but as I scroll down the search myself, I do see my eye getting drawn to images which either have a colourfully dressed person, or an extremely flat, nearly blank design. Possibly it's the contrast between the other results, the break in pattern, that's attracting my eye.
  9. I mean, right back at ya, bud. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ How about this. Instead, let's talk about the Dream Scenario enunciator posted or my List curation option. Do you have any issues with those, or are they doomed to failure without a fee? They at least attack the mechanisms through which scammers operate rather than simply thinning their margins as if that will do something to stop them.
  10. @newsmikeI do know that you never explicitly suggested it. The quoted phrasing shows that; I said 'the thought', not 'your thought'. I'm saying it's at the core of the "seller pays = better sellers" mindset, as if there cannot be a cobra effect from a seller's membership fee, as if paying a fee has a prescriptive effect inherent to it; a virtue. Scammers will not be warded off the site by a fee like a vampire is warded off by garlic. All it does is increase their cost of business and meddle with their margins. If they're profiting now, they'll be profiting then, and stick to it. The people who suffer the most will be those with desirable skill sets but not a lot of business savvy. @enunciatorThe Dream Scenario is viable, perhaps even more dream-like; the seller could get paid for the test gig. And, the test could vary in such a way that it's not predictable for scammers to go grab something pre-existing off the internet. I'm doing that vetting process right now for myself. Fiverr could open a program, something maybe like Buyer Request, where if there is a well-endorsed buyer with a lot of tasks, those tasks could be distributed as tests, the applicant sellers could interact with the buyer, and we see how it goes. I already pay for deliveries from untested/zero review sellers. There are probably other buyers doing similar. We just need a means of integration. Heck, it could probably be done via shared public Lists, but then that type of "curation" is open to a lot of biases. Maybe there could also be a community solution via public Lists?
  11. I've mentioned mine twice. You're ignoring it because it doesn't fit with the option you're pushing for, which stems from the thought that finances are a virtue on par with heart and soul. Probably people with only heart and soul but no finance to use as a crutch, put more of those two things into it to compensate. Adding the fee could remove more heart and soul than is gained, lowering quality further.
  12. All the fee guarantees is that they're putting their financial assets in, not heart and soul.
  13. A very optimistic conclusion. One that seems to assume wealth is a virtue and that moneyed sellers are consistently good sellers.
  14. Good point. Adding the fee might make the seller base trend more "speculative", leaving the share of those who do profit-seeking behaviours like upselling comparatively larger, and put buyers off the site. While trying out D&D Writers, I ran into a "professional" who basically gave me a rider of demands about getting to preview the final work, getting a free copy of the final work, etc. It was early in the process and I didn't have any final candidates yet, so I accepted the demands. His delivered product was fine, it matched his better peers for price, quality, and speed, but I didn't get any of the diva behaviour from the peers. So, I paid him for the one quest and moved on with the others for the remaining four quest types. Probably the people I continued with have fiverr as their side gig, and the high maintenance writer might have fiverr as their main gig. I've had frank conversations about price with the sellers I want to use for a lot of work, to let them know my budget, how they compare to their peers, and what I expect their work is actually worth above their peers, as part of trying to lock in the prices to some degree. A decent chunk of them are simply excited about the project, and happy to be included/appreciated, and are willing to let me sit at the entry price so they can stay part of it. Monthly fees would possibly push out those side-gig types and while retaining the seemingly-main-gig types. The reputation of fiverr might simply then morph from "low quality" to, like, "complicated" or something. So, while there would be fewer sellers, there would be fewer buyers, and competition would simply be differently rough, and fiverr overall would be smaller with less going on.
  15. To me, it's basically a cost of business. I was going to have a learning curve regardless. A good chunk of people I went back too were initially in the "bad" pile until I realized some flaw in how I write spec set them up for failure. I've changed my spec template like eight times to be more clear and hold more relevant details with fewer potentially confusing details. If I had that learning curve with higher priced people, the damage of me not knowing how to write spec would have been worse. I'd possibly already be washed out.
  16. It didn't really get discussed, because it was at the bottom of my post in the middle of the $250 debate, but I proposed a potential system for weeding out scammers without needing a fee. I'm already using the system myself because fiverr's suggestions are always upsells. I knew coming in, because of the site's reputation, that there would be a lot of waste on inadequate sellers. I budgeted an assumption that a third of the stuff I received would need to be tossed. It took me giving work to about 50 sellers to get about 100 pieces of art I can use after about 140 deliveries. About 25 sellers were just bad, 15 increased their prices within a few orders, and I have about 10 left that are likely reliable for the remaining 80 pieces I need at prices I can afford. I have similar results among the people who delivered D&D rulebook style writing. I have the data Fiverr would need to make a meaningful cut to the bottom end of a few niche category's quality without meaningfully affecting prices. It would be better for everyone, meeting all these goals, if they knew what I knew. But, the only thing they ask is if I'm satisfied or not and if I'll use the delivery or not. I paid for about 40 deliveries where I then turned around and said I'm not going to use them, after paying for them. That should make Fiverr suspicious of something. Does anything happen though? Who knows. I feel the system should be something along those lines, where when you have a buyer who is casting a wide net, do something like reduce fiver's fees so they can cast it wider, and give them a more detailed feedback options, and then put that type of stuff over to the Trust & Safety committee for review.
  17. I agree they have a need to maximize revenue, the point I'm hoping to convey is that adding a fee would not necessarily be a pure revenue win. Democratizing offshoring is consistent with the goal of fiduciary responsibility in that it monetizes a larger consumer base by increasing supply, which lowers prices to allow capturing clients from those who have a lower price tolerance, increasing total revenue rather than simply increasing the average revenue per user.
  18. To me, fiverr is democratized offshoring. I don't have the money for North American/Western Europe prices, I'm barely earning above minimum wage at my day job. I'm spending savings, not revenue, to pay the sellers here to help me with my first project. Whether or not I get to try and make a business is basically dictated by my level of access to people with lower living expenses relative to mine where my savings are actually an enticing amount. Membership fees would reduce the number of those people, ones whom are likely similarly trying to start their seller gigs off savings rather than revenue judging by how many 0-queue/0-rating sellers I've used and gone back to with more work and ratings.
  19. Taking a quick skim of my inbox, I currently have 23 sellers I'm giving repeat business to. The highest national representation is 6 of those sellers being from Indonesia. According to numbeo, a 1 bedroom apartment in the center of the national capitol (Jakarta) is about 475 USD. The individual seller I've given the highest number of orders is in the Ukraine, where a 1 bedroom apartment in the center of the national capitol (Kyiv) is about 575 USD. The individual seller I've paid the most is in Lithuania, where an apartment of that type in Vilnius is about 625 USD. If we want an analogy, a similar apartment in Washington DC is $2325. So, it's possible, for those sellers, the impact of asking for 250/mo might be like asking an American for $1,000/mo. I doubt those sellers would be here for me to work with if that kind of fee was there. It would instead be sellers with higher prices trying to recover the cost of the monthly fee. Likely, this would put prices outside my budget. As a result, I possibly would not be here either. Personally, I've accepted that there's a lot of sellers which are a waste of money. I spend the money to get them to do the work and verify for sure. The upside of always rolling the dice is that I've also found a lot of excellent sellers who were sitting there at 0 reviews, 0 orders in queue, who were cutting discounts to get growth. Many of them have since gone on to increase their prices and consistently have orders in queue. The solution to filtering bad and good, for the benefit of buyers as a whole, might be more functions which help buyers like me run this "paid audition" process more easily and cheaply. I got VID recently, and it feel kind of like it could do that, but the coupon seem to want me to make larger single orders instead of place orders with new sellers. Giving me coupons to reduce the risk of trying out new sellers would enable me to manually verify who is good and who isn't.
  20. I feel like these types of stats would reveal the kind of buyer who says X and means X.5^3*r by them having higher revision request numbers since they would be unlikely to have any attempts accepted on the first try. If it takes 20 “like this?” attempts, that feels to me like an issue of the buyer not being able to help the process and not being effectively communicative. I’m not saying to add these stats to the seller profile, but just the buyer. To me, it’s the buyer’s job to push the spec, not the seller’s job to pull it. If communication is failing, it’s probably starting upstream on the buyer’s end since the data is generated on that side. Garbage in, garbage out. My longest revision request chain was 5 or 6 pushbacks as I tried to get a logo maker to understand that I couldn’t open the file type he was sending me (.ai), so I needed a different file type (.jpg or .png). He seemed to think I was accusing him of sending me corrupted files. That hit to these types of stats would have been frustrating to me, but it’s manageable given how rare it is. It would move my 1.7/60 to a 1.8/61 or some such.
  21. Every now and then, when negotiating concept art requests, I run into artists who are adamant about getting reference images before they start. If I knew what I wanted I wouldn’t be requesting concept art. I have a feeling they’ve been burned by over-precise buyers before and I’m being pre-judged based on the wrongs other buyers have committed. I suspect they don’t want to get stuck in a revision request loop. I see that complaint a lot on here. I would love if they could see how many works I’ve accepted on the first or second delivery as a ratio of total deliveries or something. They would probably love to be able to see when a buyer runs an average of eight revision requests or cancels more than half their orders. Maybe buyers would be more considerate of their specs and what they reject if they knew they were being judged for it. I’m struggling to be a good buyer, accepting and paying for stuff I can’t use, and there’s no viable way for a seller to know that, so I get all the bad buyer hassle as if I was doing nothing.
  22. I contacted a seller for a coloured landscape. Their landscape gig has colour with a green checkmark at the Basic tier. But their response when contacted was to say that only line art was available at Basic, and colour was Standard or Premium and that they hadn’t updated the gig yet. Next day, the gig is still not updated; color shows as available at Basic. I don’t know if it takes a long time for changes to a gig to be approved or not. Either way, this feels a little Bait & Switch. Is it reportable?
  23. I had a similar experience twice for a logo at about $50 each attempt where I provided two modern logo references then asked for those to be merged in a sort of medieval tavern sign aesthetic for a fantasy D&D book. In both cases, the sellers blended the logos but kept everything stylistically modern. Neither seller seemed to have a very good grasp of english. I don’t think they really tried to read the text. I feel like buyers may need to ask the seller to sort of “read the order back” to them so see if all spec elements got noticed or not before ordering.
  24. I’m the kind of buyer who gets in arguments on the forums with sellers who think I should be paying more than $5 for landscape pictures. I’m one of the strict-budget bottom feeders for asks for the Basic tier every time. My arguments start from the stance that there are a lot of sellers, and those sellers can demonstrate valuable at the lowest price point if you dig around and just pay to see what people can do. And yet I’ve still found the budget to pay roughly $250 for 14 full body sketches, no colour, no background. If that guy’s offering less than even I would, I don’t have a lot of faith in him as a member of the buyer community. I have to vote alongside that other buyer. People are hard to draw well; everyone knows what they look like and can spot flaws. It’s a technical skill that should command a premium. If anime style fit my current projects you’d probably be getting offers from me at a higher rate as well.
  25. Another suggestion should Fiverr people stop in; add the option to remove items from the Notifications tab of the Messages list, or remove system ones once they’re actioned. Right now my Notifications Feed has 21 “How Was Your Delivery” prompts and 11 order feeds. I have 14 active orders. The “How Was Your Delivery” prompts are pushing out/hiding active order and making them harder to chase down/wrangle/track.
  • Create New...