Opinions, Is this better for the Members?


What do you guys think about the new Audiogon feedback rating system. At the end of the process and a remedy is not reached will it be possible to leave a negative feedback on a member. Below is the new policy.

"This system is being implemented so that transactions are verified by both parties prior to posting of Feedback. It provides documentation of a given transaction and allows both members to review the feedback involved before any feedback is posted. Consequently, any disagreements arising from such transactions can be mediated from a basis of fact. Furthermore, this system increases the value of Feedback as one criterion by which to judge the standing of fellow members.
The old system allowed any member to post feedback when certain written criteria were met. Now, feedback will not be posted until both members agree that there was a transaction. Also, in the past, if a member did not agree with feedback given, they only had the option to file a dispute to get it removed. Now, they can disagree with the proposed feedback before it is posted."
jea48
So it isn't really a valid feedback system.

It's like the opposite of feedback (feedforward?) The 'new' system essentially makes the posting of negative feedback difficult, if not impossible. So why have feedback at all? I could have a positve FB of 200, with 20 recent pending negatives and no one would ever know about the negatives?
It doesn't make sense.
A better way might be to have the negative feedback removed after a number of subsequent positive transactions. Like having bad credit and working towards repairing it.
New system does not allow for trades.

I left fb for a dude who did not return the favor, after what I thought was a fair and honorable trade. Either system works in this case!
Assuming your post is correct, I can only say:
"What are they thinking?"
This is a complete waste of time, IMHO. In fact, it is worse, as it is a mockery of the concept of feedback.

This method's only purpose is to post positive feedback.
Negative feedback would not only be discouraged, it would basically be obliterated. (Unless someone was stupid enought to agree to have negative feedback!)

Audiogon needs to realize that we learn not only from OUR mistakes, but from other's mistakes as well. In order to learn from other's mistakes, we must know about them.

Please do not implement this system. In fact, you should toughen up the existing system. While Ebay's system is not perfect, it is better than the current Audiogon system. My opinion is that Audiogon would do better to adopt Ebay's feedback system, where feedback is given freely and individiually, and not a consensus of the two parties. I realize that this would be difficult, as Audiogon does not use auctions for most transactions. But still, it should be possible to adopt something similar.

(The only thing I like about this new system is that it is only possible to leave feedback for someone you actually had a transaction with. Currently, you can leave feedback for anyone, at any time, regardless of any transaction having taken place. This makes it incredibly easy to manipulate the feedback system.)

Does anyone else get the feeling that this new policy is being adopted to avoid legal action against Audiogon for allowing individuals to post negative feedback against other individuals? (I thought Ebay had already fought and won that battle in court?)

My two cents worth anyway.
Sounds like it would make the feedback system totally useless to me. Seems like most everyone (so far) agrees that this is a mistake.
It seems as if the site is trying to encourage resolution of disputes through the feedback process so that anything for which a negative WOULD be left has a chance to get worked out by the parties before the feedback is permanently recorded. That said I, too, question how a negative could result from this system if one party decides to "hide" the transaction or not complete the feedback process for it.

Perhaps there is a way to achieve both goals - 1) encouraging both parties to participate in the feedback process so that there is an opportunity to resolve issues in the case of potential negative feedback, and 2) allowing for posting of negative feedback (even if the other party disagrees).

Would introducing a "delay" help? -- ie, the other party has X days (say 30) to respond to the feedback - after which, if there is no response, the feedback left would become permanent. Or, in the case of a pending negative feedback that, the party that left the feedback can return 30 days later and re-confirm the negative feedback (if there was no resolution). This would allow the other party to be "put on notice" and give them time to fix the situation before a potential negative feedback could be made permanent on their record. Just a thought.