Buying and Selling of feedback


Today I saw the second auction where the seller states something to this effect "if you don't come through with payment on a winning bid, you can give me $xx (or a percentage of the bid) and back out without negative feedback posted. otherwise, negative feedback will be posted.

This seems like extortion to me. Also, aren't the rest of us entitled to know about a deadbeat bidder (via negative feedback)? The posting of negative feedback is the correct recourse for a deadbeat bidder - not a bribe or "fine".

I think this behavior undermines the feedback process. What do the rest of you think?

Just curious.
dozer
Who are you addressing this to? In my case, I have to wait to see what the dealer who will proceed with repairs after Christmas will tell me and, more to the point, what the cost of repairs will be. The other thing I have to look at is the ins and outs of the dispute resolution process, assuming no proper agreement can be reached with the other party. "and don't be talking too soon for the wheel is still in spin..." with all due excuses to Bob Dylan.
[I know the following doesn't respond to the exact question asked, but it's tangentially germane...]

The feedback system as presently implemented, both here and on ebay, is too intrinsically susceptible to pressure and manipulation to be of much use. Negatives will always be underreported, due both to a justified fear of retaliation (I know, it happened to me on ebay) and to the prevailing informal quid pro quo concerning the trading of generic positives.

I have fantasized about a possible technological fix (not that I would have the faintest idea as to whether, or how, it could be practically implemented): It seems to me that if a feedback system could be designed so that neither party (and maybe no one else either) could see one of the feedbacks before the other was posted (in other words, neither party would have to 'go first'), then each feedback could be written more honestly without fear of reprisal. This would also be a somewhat 'followup-proof' system, in that one party would look pretty foolish if they initially posted positive feedback when they were unaware of the other party's complaint, and then went back and followed-up with secondary negative feedback in obvious retaliation. The inconsistency would hang them by their own petard.

As an analogy, think about a properly functioning electoral democracy: You must implement the all-important secret ballot for it to work as intended. My 'double-blind' feedback system idea is the equivalent of the secret ballot. Like I say, I don't really know how or if this could be accomplished, but to me it doesn't seem very far-fetched in concept. Any opinions?
No PBB; I was not referring to you. You do bring up a great point. The Audiogon dispute resolution process is the next step after a reasoned and dispassionate discourse with the problem seller. Feedback, which can only be left once, is often left too quickly and sometimes in anger before the situation has had a chance to resolve itself. Many problems get out of hand simply by the way that the interchanges between seller and buyer escalate. Most of our trading partners are quite reasonable and often unaware of defects in the goods that they sell. Most are also all too eager to correct the wrong when they are made aware of it politely. In those cases where they are not Audiogon is the fall back. But here too, the facts should be presented without prejudice and personal attack.
Viridian, making such a personal & vitriolic attack upon me is uncalled for. You don't know the details; who are you to judge? You apparently have no concept that there are people out there, even on this site, who are difficult to expose because they have thought their deceptions through quite thoroughly to deter someone they have tried to scam from reporting them. Audiogon is not perfect; nothing is. The one dispute I initiated on this site was a bit more in the "grey" area, although I strongly feel my dispute was valid. However, a number of responders seemed almost to delight in cutting me down.

If you read the disputes section with discernment, you can decipher that in some cases, one party is being honest, but the other is not -- the problem is that sometimes you cannot tell which is the honest party. If anyone wants to email me personally regarding the unreported problem, I will be glad to carry on a dialogue with them.
I pay no attention to feedback. I find it totally unenlightening. Then again I won't buy any expensive items without actually meeting the seller. I once drove from Chicago to eastern Tennessee to buy a $3,000 amp. For me the time and effort were well worth the piece of mind from knowing that the transaction would go smoothly and to my liking.