Silk Road forums

Discussion => Silk Road discussion => Topic started by: Kappacino on March 03, 2013, 09:44 pm

Title: On FE: What are your priorities?
Post by: Kappacino on March 03, 2013, 09:44 pm
It is common on SR to have various times when many are scammed, and many come to the forums to vent their frustrations, as they have lost money. These times come and go but sooner or later the topic always comes to the question of FE. Then things are forgotten, business goes on, then another big scam takes place, the same things are said, and the people react in the same way. And so on.

We are currently in one of those times, and there is a lot of talk specifically on the question of whether FE should just be banned out right. Those who of course have just lost a lot of money, will most likely prefer this option, as is to be expected. But is it really sensible to just go straight from loss to a reactive solution, with certainty, without thinking all the angles through?

What are the factors here?

There are certain arguments that say that allowing FE can ease up cash flow and therefore the rate of resupply, which is of course what is ideal for vendors if they are to remain constant and uninterrupted, which I'm sure is their goal. And vendors will be in all types of varied positions depending on how much they actually hold within their SR business, and how much they hold off SR that can be used to resupply product if funds are held in escrow. There will be a spectrum of positions that vendors find themselves in. One may have a decent amount of cash, so will not be too worried to hold funds in escrow, as they can always use excess capital to rebuy stock, or the necessary reagents to produce said stock.

For those whose stock relies more heavily on a limited growing operation (where the time that it takes to resupply product is much more than the rate at which it takes to do a decent chemical tech, or to simply rebuy, think months compared to a weekend or an afternoon transaction), their commitment to maintaining a constant presence in the SR listings will probably be more seasonal, and based on incoming harvest times. That is to say, they will probably just accept this, and so will not much think about the profit they could be making, if they can't feasibly scale their operation up. Perhaps these people are irrelevant to this specific discussion, unless start up costs for their grow are that high a percentage of their total revenue, that they need quicker cash flow and therefore would be likely to prefer to be able to ask for FE.

Another type of vendors may not have enough money to resupply, until all funds have been released from escrow. Therefore their business is interrupted and they aren't earning all the possible profit they could be. So for them, they may say that they want FE as it helps them to maximize their profit and keep their business running smoothly. Those coming from a "maximizing business and keeping regular loyal customers" perspective, are obviously thinking this.

Then more simply, we have the vendors that are much more worried about scammers and demand FE, perhaps in all cases, simply because they fear losing money.

So regarding this point, the question here is what do we think matters more, that vendors are allowed to ask for FE as both we and they would prefer that their business remain constant and always available, or that FE is too much of a risk to the buyer to be allowed, and we should give preferential treatment to buyer safety?

This question of course has to be asked with the added factor, of whether we allow brand new accounts to remain within escrow. This seems to be very open to scammers. It is literally as simple as making a new account and buying something, then fucking off. Given how easy this is to do I think a convincing argument could be made for at the very least, allowing vendors to ask for new buyers with no purchase stats to FE until it appears they can be trusted.

All these arguments of course assume that we even consider the possibility that we do want, the SR authority figure to come in, and restrict the freedom of SR,  as our safety and peace of mind as BUYERS, is more important.

Or do we think that the real spirit of SR is to allow it to be free? TO ALLOW CHOICE. To let anyone have their own policy, and to allow vendors and buyers alike to elect whether they want to use escrow. Anarchism is of course in a sense darwinist, as those who make bad decisions will certainly fail and be the victims, but let's face it, who has agency here? We all do, we all carry out our own transactions and interactions. You are free, if it is your preference, to not do business with someone, if you don't like their policies. It is up to you if you take that risk, just as it is up to vendors if they wish to take the risk of allowing FE. If you get burned, well you took a risk, you knew the cards.

I'd argue that for long we've been asking to be treated like adults in society. The reason SR was made, is because we aren't treated as such. And here we are, taking the risk of state sanctioned punishments, making that choice, to buy substances of various kinds, because we want to digest them for whatever end it is we seek. That's exactly what it is going on here, and everyone here decided to take the risk. And we've all grown to detest the people that try to punish us for this, for the people that tell us that we are not free to make that choice. And all of us, accept that some people do fucked up things on drugs, but that we as individuals should still be free to make that choice for ourselves, as our freedom is most important to us.

With that in mind, the ultimate question is what are your priorities? And are they consistent across your whole life? Do you want to the SR authority, the power, the one who makes the rules, the code writer, to come in, and limit the free choices we can make, because we prioritize the right of buyer safety, over that of the right of both buyer and vendor alike to choose? Are you not free to choose, and accept the consequences that come to you?

As long as SR exists there will always be scammers and these questions will always have to be asked. I think it is important that we actually ask ourselves what do we want out of SR, and what do we expect from this hidden economy here. And whether it is reasonable and congruent with our larger world view, to ask that the freedom of it be restricted.


Title: Re: On FE: What are your priorities?
Post by: smogmonster13 on March 04, 2013, 12:03 am
I'm glad for the discussion, OP. Thanks.

You might be tipping your hand when you frame your philosophical discussion as buyer safety or freedom. I'm not sure I agree with the way you've outlined the choice here, but I'll think about it.  ;)

Here are some additional points to add to your own.

The vendor has a choice, too, based on the buyer's stats. Refuse business with anyone who has not yet established the stats sufficient for your comfort, in the same way that a buyer can refuse to patronize a vendor who has received significant negative feedback. An interesting question is, are the choices and risks presented here equitable between buyer and vendor? I don't think they are.

I think the risk for the buyer to be selectively scammed by a vendor with 5/5 ratings is higher than the risk of a vendor being scammed by a buyer who has accumulated AFs or refunds. It seems to me that number of packages that have gone missing on SR is greatly in excess of the national average.

I would prioritize a well-regulated SR over a "free" (and I might offer caveat emptor) SR, because I think a more confident and marketplace will benefit all more so than a vendor with more consistent cash flow will benefit all.
Title: Re: On FE: What are your priorities?
Post by: Pharmington Rex on March 04, 2013, 12:23 am
You raise many excellent points and present a well thought out argument.

As a new vendor made up of former buyers, the one thing we do not like is the matter of finalizing early. We never had to do it as we've been members of SR before the FE madness became as claimed, a matter of defense against rogue new buyers who attempt to defraud vendors with tales of non-delivery or delivery of fake/weak product. In spite of the risk taking on new SR buyers, it's a matter of policy that we will not ask a patron to finalize early. Rather, if we find that a patron does not have the requisite Purchasing Stats, we simply limit the size of the transaction which in turn limits the size of any possible loss we may incur from a rogue buyer. Moreover, this policy affords the relatively new SR buyer the protection of escrow of which is SR's crowning system.

Now, if a patron wishes to finalize on their own accord and of their free will, we cannot prevent them from doing so. We would process the order as any other except we would be obligated to maintain separate encrypted records for such an order so it does not get lost or forgotten. Early finalized orders do not show on the order roster. Something buyers may not realize and why sometimes they do not receive their orders. Well that and some vendors do engage in selective scamming of new SR buyers.

For bulk orders, we plan on employing a system whereby the patron is given 2 listings for the same order. The first listing, let's call it "Pre-order," we would represent 50% of the total of the bulk order. We would have the patron early finalize this 50% of the total order. The second listing, let's call it "Order completion" would be held in escrow and finalized upon receipt of the entirety of the bulk order.

This represents an equitable shared risk scenario. Our cash flow wouldn't be unduly disrupted by having to service an order of this magnitude while the patron limits his or her risk to a maximum of 50% in the event we fail to deliver as agreed or fail to satisfy the patron. If everything goes well, we receive two 5/5 feedback ratings for the singular bulk order. Contrariwise, if things go badly, we could receive two 1/5 ratings which would have a significant impact on our vendor rating. So it would be in our best interest to see to our patron's satisfaction and meet any reasonable demands they may have towards that end. 

To minimize the disaster that FE has often inflicted, such as the infamous Tony76 debacle, it's up to both the seller and the buyer to make a coalition against it. We shouldn't rely on SR management to micromanage every aspect of what is supposed to be a free, libertarian marketplace. We must simply choose whom we wish to conduct business with and at what level we both, seller and buyer, feel comfortable at.

New SR buyers need to develop Purchasing Stats. Sellers must earn a reputation of trust and excellence. We believe that new buyers should be able to safely partake in this amazing marketplace. But for their protection as well as the protection of the seller, new buyers should rather expect limits on the amount they can order until they have proven themselves to be capable to managing such large transactions as opposed to paying for the entire order upfront. To hand over the entire sum of one's order to an anonymous seller before taking possession of the goods purchased, is the height of wanton risk taking on the account of the buyer. And since so many seem so willing to do so, so many sellers feel it a matter of opportunity that shouldn't be ignored or not taken advantage of.

Lastly, given TOR's slow transmission speeds as well as SR's rather defunct search engine, it's difficult for buyers to find sellers willing to take on new SR buyers without having to finalize early. Perhaps, I propose, a list be made of vendors who are willing to allow new SR buyers the benefit of conducting trade via escrow (with or without order size limits). Call it a web of trust.
Title: Re: On FE: What are your priorities?
Post by: bill417 on March 04, 2013, 12:36 am
For me, I see Finalising Early as taking part-responsibility for something that the buyer really shouldn't be... Why is it the buyer who's forced to lose-out (by not having any support) simply because the vendor hasn't managed their time or their stock better (etc).

I just don't understand - given a properly structured business plan with good communication and good customer service - how vendors (especially new ones) continually ask for FE when more and more people are either having negative experiences from doing so (selective scamming etc) or are learning to avoid vendors who ask for FE. There really shouldn't be this necessity with a professional business.

You know, this one would be debated over and over and over without any successful resolution in abolishing FE altogether, or it staying (which we already have), or perhaps a new system.

In reality, if a deal goes wrong you can use your Human Rights and follow the relevant legal proceedings seeking legal advice regarding your experience, to question whether they (the seller/ company/ business) can be liable under law.
This system of assurance and support is not available when you're buying illicit materials off a site that allows Third-Parties to operate as individual entities who make their own rules regarding transactions - who can buy and the terms they must adhere to.
As long as the vendor doesn't breach SR Rules and Regulations, they can make whatever requests they choose.

And it's for this reason that I believe that every single transaction, no matter how big or small, should remain in Escrow. Let's be honest - even if you do need to take a transaction to the Resolution Centre, the vendor can choose to only give a 25% refund or re-ship the product, or even take the attitude of "My terms of no refunds and no reships is on my profile" and therefore not offer any resolution.

Then that buyer can rely on the rating he submits as being genuine and honest, and visit these forums to tell the community their point of view.

Remember, there's at least two sides to every story. Most people on this site use it to purchase illegal materials, and when doing so you must always re-consider this, and regard placing an order with anyone as potentially very risky (police/ scam/ no refund/ no customer service).
Title: Re: On FE: What are your priorities?
Post by: snailgod on March 04, 2013, 12:42 am
As long as there are actually choices, I'm content for the rules to remain as they are. Once all vendors start requiring it, there's a problem. I have no intentions to send my money to some anonymous person on the internet with no real guarantee I'll get what I paid for.

I'm not sure why people think that because this site thwarts government laws, it should have no rules of its own. People come here because it's a fairly safe place to buy illegal products that shouldn't really be illegal in the first place. They don't come here because they're anarchists who want to get ripped off.

I like Pharmington Rex's solution, if you don't trust the buyer, have them buy inexpensive amounts of product. That reduces the risk for both sides.
Title: Re: On FE: What are your priorities?
Post by: zerik on March 04, 2013, 08:21 am
Clearly some kind of change is needed. There are a lot of I got scammed threads by x vendor with a perfect rating etc.. It is mostly new people getting scammed.

Just the other day some one called SR topix road. Now that is not a fair comparison by any means. I would like to see SR and the forum stand out among other sites.

Also this isn't really a free market. Side deals and such are not allowed because people have to pay their fee. There are limits on what can be sold here as well. You can't sell weapons, poisons or cp for good reason. These are rules that but barriers on trade here. As I mentioned above I think the scamers harm the sites reputation.

I don't understand how vendors are harmed by eliminating the FE option.

If a buyer drops dead of a heart attack then the vendor does still get paid. But if the FE option is used and something should happen to the seller the buyer is screwed. He/she can't do anything to try and find the person that ripped them off and Sr of course can't help. But a scammer could easily start over the next day and scam people again with a new account.

For now your idea of a list of vendors who do not require FE is a good one. It could help both parties. It is at least a place to begin instead of having the admin step in.

 
Title: Re: On FE: What are your priorities?
Post by: XXXotica on March 04, 2013, 01:06 pm
Coming from someone who was an extremely active buyer from SR before becoming a vendor, id say the rules are fine. I don't require/ force anyone to FE and neither does any other vendor. We're all adults who can make our own decision. Its simple, don't order from vendors who ask/ require FE. If someone is to FE that's their choice and obviously they know/ accept the risk that comes with it. So essentially we're asking DPR to babysit adults? I never require FE but at the same time I dont frown upon those who might. Its their business and if they have customers who are still willing to do business with them then so be it. Its the same with MP to BTC transactions. YOU KNOW THE RISK, so why cry when what you know could of happened, happens. When you go to the zoo, you know the Lion cage is dangerous, do you still go in it anyway? Or do you watch them, observe, then go home and play with your safe German Shepard.
Title: Re: On FE: What are your priorities?
Post by: Petimus on March 04, 2013, 04:24 pm
I am fairly new to SR, only two purchases so far.  I did my research before making my first and second purchase.  I actively sought out Vendors who did not require FE, and will not purchase from a Vendor that does.  I feel that maybe we are missing the point in all this though.  Its that lack of education on SR that is the issue at hand.  Lets be honest about the situation, a new member may have all the materials to thoroughly educate themselves on SR, but some do not and are taken advantage of by selective scamming.  I feel anyone creating a new user account must first be forced to read the buyers guide before being allowed to start making purchases. 

Now on to the subject of Vendors requiring to FE.  On small orders, less than 300.00, FE should not be allowed period.  One poster had a great idea on bulk purchases that seems very reasonable which was 50% up front and 50% upon delivery.  Both take a shared risk in the transaction, and keeps everyone involved remotely honest.   When I first started researching Vendors, I was completely blown away with all the Vendors requiring FE.  Also if you look at new Vendors, their copying this practice. This is another instance of FE that should be banned.  The argument about "Don't buy from Vendors that require FE" is a mute point when the majority of the market place is flooded with Vendors that require it, thus making options fewer for buyers who don't want to be scammed.

Just my 2 cents :P
Title: Re: On FE: What are your priorities?
Post by: flaxceed on March 04, 2013, 05:08 pm
Freedom should be first.  Let vendors vend how they want and buyers choose who they will.

Back when I was doing full escrow I was stunned at all of the scammers with good feedback.  The term "selective scammer" is common now.  Somebody pays for all of that scamming, and it is you, dear buyer.  You pay with higher prices from dealers who allow escrow.  How can you beat my prices when I get paid instantly and never get scammed?

I used to get $100 for a bottle of testosterone, and now I get $60.  Do the math- FE is always cheaper.  Money is never free, and that applies on or off of Silk Road.
Title: Re: On FE: What are your priorities?
Post by: Petimus on March 04, 2013, 06:53 pm
Flaxseed it is clear that you are trying to put all the risk on the buyer, and why wouldn't you its more profits for you.  Your argument about Vendors charging more for product is trivial at best.  Both Vendors I purchased from that did not require FE had prices completely inline with what FE Vendors had.  And the quote about freedom?  The freedom to be scammed?  How about regulation?  You act like SR has no policies or procedures, or standards for that matter.  The whole reason for escrow was to regulate sellers and protect buyers from being scammed.  You don't sell insolvent mortgage-related securities IRL do you, because I'm starting to wonder.
Title: Re: On FE: What are your priorities?
Post by: smogmonster13 on March 04, 2013, 11:38 pm
No need to call anyone a credit default swap jockey.  :)

It seems clear that the intent is to use the escrow system. Can vendors circumvent the escrow, yes? But for those who argue for a more-free marketplace, it makes sense to institute policies that level the playing field. We all want a marketplace where the vendors that supply the best quality products at the best possible prices with the best service will also be the most highly rated. We don't want them to compete on the basis of who uses the intended escrow system and who does not.

I don't think it's baby sitting, I think it's making the market work better for more people.

The next subject our OP should tackle is the rating system, which makes it difficult to compare 5/5 ratings (but that's for another topic)  :)

Thanks for the great discussion.
Title: Re: On FE: What are your priorities?
Post by: oldtoby on March 05, 2013, 02:02 am
This question of course has to be asked with the added factor, of whether we allow brand new accounts to remain within escrow. This seems to be very open to scammers. It is literally as simple as making a new account and buying something, then fucking off.

What am I missing here? How did the buyer put their order in escrow in the first place without any bitcoins on the line? Are you telling me that I can place a hundred orders with a zero balance and have them mailed out? Cause that sounds like a serious, nigh fatal, design flaw. Or maybe you're just completely mis-describing the situation in order to argue one side in utter bad faith.

There are already rules and restrictions on the Road. No weapons, no (pure) poisons. Repeat scammers don't find themselves in a "buyer beware" paradise; they're banned. The Road's architecture already builds in numerous decision points, so pretending like removing the FE option would be a bite from the apple in the garden of libertarian Eden is a little silly.
Title: Re: On FE: What are your priorities?
Post by: dementyev6969 on March 05, 2013, 03:10 am
I don't think anyone who has +5 orders, or +10, whatever enough is to no longer be considered a 'new' buyer should ever FE.

An intelligent thought out business plan should allow for sufficient cash flow to maintain operation without needing people to FE.  Smart vendors should take down their listings if needed so they don't bit off more than they can chew - that's just basic planning, shouldn't be too hard.  If you're selling on SR then guess what, you're running a business, be professional about it and you'll get more new & repeat customers, make avoidable planning mistakes and people will go elsewhere.

Going back to basic principles - what is the purpose of the escrow system?  To establish some basis for a level of trust between buyer & seller - it's the main reason SR isn't just one giant clusterfuck of scamming - and to introduce some way of managing the inherent risk involved in this business.  It's risk management - admin has no doubt studied the issue some but maybe they should study it more.  Once there's more SR like sites (BMR anyone?) on the deepweb what's to distinguish SR from its competition?  Good well thought out risk management policies that's what.

I think it would be interesting what would happen if FE was totally disallowed, or only allowed for the first 5 or 10 or so purchases.  It might partially or totally destroy SR and/or it might force (more) vendors to behave like real professional business owners: ie make a business plan before just going nuts taking orders and worrying about cash flow & stocking after its too late and their customers are all pissed off & paranoid.  Personally I think it's ok as it is though, I wish more buyers would just adopt a never FE policy though.  Look at it this way - every time you FE you destroy a little bit of the trust & risk distribution/management that is the glue that makes transactions like this possible.  A 50% up front and 50% upon delivery as an ordering option might be interesting, it would discourage scamming on both ends by making it less profitable.  Although that is kind of the same as the common 50% refund for no show policy a lot of vendors use except the outcome depends on what the resolution center decides - introducing a bit of uncertainty - (why trust the resolution center any more than some random vendor?) which I'm not sure about, how does the resolution center usually come down in cases like that?

Maybe SR could introduce some kind of small incentive program to discourage FE after the first 5 or 10 orders.  Because if the escrow system becomes unreliable - even if its just due to shitloads of starry eyed trusting buyers who FE everything & SR becomming orerrun by FE requiring vendors - then SR will take a dive.  Not saying it would die but it'd be far less attractive an option compared to every other deepweb site selling less than legal items.

Damn good thread.
Title: Re: On FE: What are your priorities?
Post by: flaxceed on March 05, 2013, 05:07 am
Flaxseed it is clear that you are trying to put all the risk on the buyer, and why wouldn't you its more profits for you.  Your argument about Vendors charging more for product is trivial at best.  Both Vendors I purchased from that did not require FE had prices completely inline with what FE Vendors had.  And the quote about freedom?  The freedom to be scammed?  How about regulation?  You act like SR has no policies or procedures, or standards for that matter.  The whole reason for escrow was to regulate sellers and protect buyers from being scammed.  You don't sell insolvent mortgage-related securities IRL do you, because I'm starting to wonder.

My buyers and I agree on how to do business.  Why should you have the power to tell us otherwise?  What makes you so special?
Title: Re: On FE: What are your priorities?
Post by: zerik on March 05, 2013, 06:41 am
SR taking a dive is exactly what I am afraid of. Scams do harm the credibility of the site. It isn't like scamers are a rare event here. It's becoming a frequent occurrence here. Scamers have wrecked other forums and could here if left unchecked for too long.

It isn't like a buyer can research a buyers stats and make an informed choice or risk. The rating system is unreliable. At the very least we should have a blind rating where the vendor can't tell who gave what feedback. The system now is completely unfair to the true A+ vendors as they have the same rate as so so vendors. But guess thats a topic for another thread.

No one as come up with a rational argument of how FE harms vendors or would harm SR. People just make the free market argument which has already been discredited. There are rules here that are far more intrusive than the FE rule. If they stopped FE the majority of vendors wouldn't leave. Their customers are here, they get more $ for their products here than other places.

All that will happen by eliminating FE is the site will become more secure, trusted, and more profitable. Sure there will still be some scams. You will never reduce that to zero. But it can be made much harder for thieves to thrive here.
Title: Re: On FE: What are your priorities?
Post by: Petimus on March 05, 2013, 01:58 pm
Having a lot of great input here.  There are two "ideals" I'd like to tackle.  The first being this argument for libertarianism.  Just because were able to purchase illicit products on SR does not make this a utopia for libertarianism.  As I noted above (which clearly one poster didn't read) SR has a governing body that imposes rules and regulations.  In a completely free market a governing body does not exist.  I wonder how many sellers would actually FE if they were educated about the dangers of it?  I'm sure the percentage would drop considerably.

Second is freedom.  As vendors, do you get to choose how much SR takes as commission from your sales?  No?  Okay, how about the Armory?  I wonder how all those vendors feel about this "free market".  Their "free market" was completely banned by the governing body of SR.  What we all have is a privilege, nothing more, nothing less.  And as noted above, the governing body of SR can amend any policy on the "free market" at will.  Whats free about that?  Someone please present an educated argument to my post,  I'd like to hear the other side of this argument using the information I've presented.
Title: Re: On FE: What are your priorities?
Post by: smogmonster13 on March 05, 2013, 03:03 pm
Having a lot of great input here.  There are two "ideals" I'd like to tackle.  The first being this argument for libertarianism.  Just because were able to purchase illicit products on SR does not make this a utopia for libertarianism.  As I noted above (which clearly one poster didn't read) SR has a governing body that imposes rules and regulations.  In a completely free market a governing body does not exist.  I wonder how many sellers would actually FE if they were educated about the dangers of it?  I'm sure the percentage would drop considerably.

Second is freedom.  As vendors, do you get to choose how much SR takes as commission from your sales?  No?  Okay, how about the Armory?  I wonder how all those vendors feel about this "free market".  Their "free market" was completely banned by the governing body of SR.  What we all have is a privilege, nothing more, nothing less.  And as noted above, the governing body of SR can amend any policy on the "free market" at will.  Whats free about that?  Someone please present an educated argument to my post,  I'd like to hear the other side of this argument using the information I've presented.

Can't argue against you Petimus because I agree with you. Although, I think we may be moving from a practical and thoughtful question posed by the OP about FE. And after seeing the arguments well advanced here, I'm convinced it would be better to not have FE. The ideal way would be a buyer's movement to not FE, on their honor. If no one ever did it, it would quickly disappear without any intervention.

However, in the absence of such a movement (I argued for it on the Newbie page to no avail), I would say the next best thing would be to disallow it. I'm not even sure we've eliminated choice for vendors significantly, as they can still set up their businesses elsewhere. The present system does encourage selective scamming, and it also encourages rogue moves like Enter The Matrix, Tony76, etc., take the money and run.

I love the privilege. I respect what has been created. I think there are many good vendors and many good buyers all struggling to find each other. The system needs some tweaks, IMHO.
Title: Re: On FE: What are your priorities?
Post by: ANewLife on March 05, 2013, 04:17 pm
SR taking a dive is exactly what I am afraid of. Scams do harm the credibility of the site. It isn't like scamers are a rare event here. It's becoming a frequent occurrence here. Scamers have wrecked other forums and could here if left unchecked for too long.

It isn't like a buyer can research a buyers stats and make an informed choice or risk. The rating system is unreliable. At the very least we should have a blind rating where the vendor can't tell who gave what feedback. The system now is completely unfair to the true A+ vendors as they have the same rate as so so vendors. But guess thats a topic for another thread.

No one as come up with a rational argument of how FE harms vendors or would harm SR. People just make the free market argument which has already been discredited. There are rules here that are far more intrusive than the FE rule. If they stopped FE the majority of vendors wouldn't leave. Their customers are here, they get more $ for their products here than other places.

All that will happen by eliminating FE is the site will become more secure, trusted, and more profitable. Sure there will still be some scams. You will never reduce that to zero. But it can be made much harder for thieves to thrive here.

+1 Totally agree. Integrity is everything - This ain't the Ghetto. Buyers will become less likely to use SR, so Vendor prices will have to go down to try and attract the remaining people willing to purchase on SR.
I think some Vendors are only hurting themselves and the SR community. We need more business men as Vendors and less street thug drug dealers
Title: Re: On FE: What are your priorities?
Post by: Pharmington Rex on March 05, 2013, 09:16 pm
We believe the best alternative is to instill in the minds of inexperienced buyers that you can't come to SR and buy a metric fuck-ton of drugs just because you flooded your account with BTC. IRL, an uninitiated or non-introduced buyer can't expect a seller to conduct sizable business with them on the first meeting.

Well, being that this is an anonymous marketplace rife with opportunists trying to take advantage where and whenever they can, the best practice, as IRL, would be to limit exposure until either or both parties are more comfortable conducting trade with one another.

What are we saying then?

Rather than having new or inexperienced buyers finalize early for fear that they will attempt a reverse scam of sorts against the vendor, a vendor should simply limit the size and scope of the transaction conducted with a new or inexperienced buyer. Each vendor must figure out for themselves what they would consider an acceptable loss and set the limit there. So if a vendor is not willing to lose more than say $100 in wholesale cost, on any one transaction, then the vendor should set the limit for new buyers at whatever markup would represent an acceptable loss and then conduct business via escrow.

If the buyer insists on ordering above the vendor's policy limit for new or inexperienced buyers, then the choice to offer the seller to FE is left to the buyer as no seller would refuse a buyer willing to front the money for an order.

The other scenario concerns bulk orders. In many cases, vendors on SR are resellers. Some may use drop shipping, they may actually stock the product or use a combination of both. Bulk orders conducted in escrow can present cash flow and product flow challenges for the vendor. Under these circumstances, the old school 50/50 rule would be beneficial to both parties. It's a shared risk. 50% FE'd, 50% held escrow to be finalized on delivery. Or whatever percentage the parties agree upon. Of course such a transaction can only be facilitated by using two tandem listings to represent 1 order.


In any event, there's no feasible way to eliminate FE. Possibly the best thing that can be done is to create a coalition of vendors who are willing to take on new clients and publish a list so new buyers know with whom they can do business with and on what terms, with a list of their inventory made public.

Because Tor can be so slow, and SR's search not precise, buyers are willing to FE because searching and researching on Tor is too frustrating at times and the new buyer decides that he'd rather just pay the cheapest price found only to learn he must FE before shipping will occur. Not wanting to waste any more time or be rude to the vendor, he relents - crossing his fingers....

Title: Re: On FE: What are your priorities?
Post by: bill417 on March 05, 2013, 09:57 pm
We believe the best alternative is to instill in the minds of inexperienced buyers that you can't come to SR and buy a metric fuck-ton of drugs just because you flooded your account with BTC. IRL, an uninitiated or non-introduced buyer can't expect a seller to conduct sizable business with them on the first meeting.

I don't think you're totally right here actually. I've ran two of my own businesses in the past (both legitimate of course) and, no matter whether they were a brand new customer ordering £2000 of goods or £20, their custom was accepted either way. We paid a bit more attention for the individuals paying more than others making sure that customer service was more than 100%, but apart from that I think you're wrong. The only time I've heard of refused custom is when complaints had been made, customer became aggressive/ violent or some other cause, but never simply because they've not heard of your name.

The quickest way to lose business (money) is to refuse custom, especially if the reason is "because you're new here" - there is nothing in the buyers guide which states that there is, or should be a prerequisite for purchasing illegal items, or a certain quantity of illegal items.
Would you insinuate that a lottery winner who's never driven a car before, should not, or cannot purchase a Rolls-Royce?

Quote
Rather than having new or inexperienced buyers finalize early for fear that they will attempt a reverse scam of sorts against the vendor, a vendor should simply limit the size and scope of the transaction conducted with a new or inexperienced buyer. Each vendor must figure out for themselves what they would consider an acceptable loss and set the limit there. So if a vendor is not willing to lose more than say $100 in wholesale cost, on any one transaction, then the vendor should set the limit for new buyers at whatever markup would represent an acceptable loss and then conduct business via escrow.

I understand and agree that a vendor dealing with a new customer may, or should be, slightly apprehensive - or should devise measures in order to protect themselves, limiting the first X purchases to smaller deals, that's fair enough. However, you seem to be saying this from the seller's point of view, "fear...reverse scam...against the vendor". I'd just like to point out very quickly that if FE occurs, the buyer looses out, and the seller wins, simply because the buyer hasn't got any support whatsoever. The customer's interests should be far more important than you're own business interests, because without the customers you have no business.

Said even more clearly:- The customer is always right - if they don't like whatever terms and conditions, pricing, seller attitude etc - they can simply choose not to order and go elsewhere. No customers = no business.

Quote
If the buyer insists on ordering above the vendor's policy limit for new or inexperienced buyers, then the choice to offer the seller to FE is left to the buyer as no seller would refuse a buyer willing to front the money for an order.


Agreed. Although you do slightly contradict yourself with reference to your opening paragraph.

Quote
The other scenario concerns bulk orders. In many cases, vendors on SR are resellers. Some may use drop shipping, they may actually stock the product or use a combination of both. Bulk orders conducted in escrow can present cash flow and product flow challenges for the vendor. Under these circumstances, the old school 50/50 rule would be beneficial to both parties. It's a shared risk. 50% FE'd, 50% held escrow to be finalized on delivery. Or whatever percentage the parties agree upon. Of course such a transaction can only be facilitated by using two tandem listings to represent 1 order.

A shared risk seems very acceptable, but that's one thing. Taking the non-FE'd transaction to Escrow, with the vendor "using his word against the buyer" - who complains they've not received their product yet - could result in issues. This would rely on the seller being genuine, and I'm sorry to say that this isn't as often as we'd all like on SR. They're few and far between in this small world.

Quote
Because Tor can be so slow, and SR's search not precise, buyers are willing to FE because searching and researching on Tor is too frustrating at times and the new buyer decides that he'd rather just pay the cheapest price found only to learn he must FE before shipping will occur. Not wanting to waste any more time or be rude to the vendor, he relents - crossing his fingers....

Research - can't people have two web-browsers open at once - one of them being the Tor Browser, the other Internet Explorer, or whatever you use these days? TOR should be used for things you want to anonymise and anything ".onion", not for anything research based, as most of that should be in ClearNet.
Getting a new TV - sure, most people know how to set them up and use them, but if you read the manual you can find there's so much more to it. No difference for the Silk Road buyers guide. It should be made mandatory to read before making an order. Then if any individual FE'd they can only blame themselves. TOR being slow or even "frustrating" is not good enough reason to say "sod it" and order blindly - do people actually still do this in the world? Must be getting old.

I've only done a small number of substances in my time, but no matter what research I've done, considering the majority of the world operates under prohibition for illicit drugs, quality is far more important than quantity in every regard, considering you get contaminated/ non-genuine products quite often. Pricing always comes into things, but I've found "you always get what you pay for" - there have been a couple of real cracker deals I've had my hands on in the past but it's a saying in common use for good reason. Although I definitely agree new buyers should start small.
Title: Re: On FE: What are your priorities?
Post by: Pharmington Rex on March 05, 2013, 11:01 pm
@Bill417,

I think a point of two may have been inadvertently confused. You're correlating IRL business with SR's illicit and anonymous business model. The two have stark differences. IRL, legitimate business, both buyer and seller have many means of redress at their disposal.  On SR, it's just SR resolutions.

Perhaps an illustration is in order.

New buyer comes about looking to place a $2,000USD order and expects it held in escrow. Heh. He receives the product, realizes that there's a DCN on it so he knows he can't claim he didn't receive it. Then he thinks, "Eureka!" Subsequently he makes a claim of "bunk! Fake product!" to the vendor and threatens to leave 1/5 unless a refund is given within enough days before the resolve button goes live. You do a bit of back and forth with the buyer dispelling their claim - even pointing to the fact that they are the only one who has made this contradictory claim - either in feedback or on the forum. Then the resolve button goes live and he files a claim with SR resolutions. SR resolutions, not really giving two or at most three shites that particular day, arbitrarily gives the buyer a 50% refund.   

That's just one of many old hand scenarios new buyers attempt every so often. They are more prone to do it to new sellers or sellers who's rating has dropped below 95%.

So... rather than assume they will all try it, we simply limit the amount they can purchase initially. As we get more comfortable with them, the limit increases. After perhaps 3 deals, we impose no limits. However, and this is no contradiction, if they choose of their own free will to FE, we will honour the order. We just refuse to ask new buyers to FE. We were buyers once, having been here for over a year and never had to FE, ever. Never lost any money other than rude fluctuations in BTC at inopportune moments.

You know, the good old days of SR before the epic and legendary Tony76, Vortexmilkman, et al FE scams.

In any event, that is all we wanted to resolve. We're basically in agreement with neither of us having the perfect solution to the problem. Each new idea brings with it, new scenarios with unintended consequences.



Title: Re: On FE: What are your priorities?
Post by: bill417 on March 06, 2013, 12:55 am
Ahh right I see it now...

Head was all a bit confused with that!
Title: Re: On FE: What are your priorities?
Post by: zerik on March 06, 2013, 02:01 am
How often does that actually happen though? I have only seen one such example of what you are talking about.   

I would send the email to Sr support as proof of the scam.

No question, vendors are susceptible to scams just as buyers are. Believe me I know the never ending headaches of running an on line business. I fully sympathize with that. But, these headaches and scam would be there even if the vendor did not require FE.

I remember you also trying to tell people not to Fe. If buyers would just not do it then fewer vendors would ask. All we can do is educate people and hope one day the rules get changed.

This is a good topic but I don't want vendors to feel beat up on. There are some very good ones in fact that are very professional. 

Title: Re: On FE: What are your priorities?
Post by: Pharmington Rex on March 06, 2013, 08:34 pm
How often does that actually happen though? I have only seen one such example of what you are talking about.   

I would send the email to Sr support as proof of the scam.

No question, vendors are susceptible to scams just as buyers are. Believe me I know the never ending headaches of running an on line business. I fully sympathize with that. But, these headaches and scam would be there even if the vendor did not require FE.

I remember you also trying to tell people not to Fe. If buyers would just not do it then fewer vendors would ask. All we can do is educate people and hope one day the rules get changed.

This is a good topic but I don't want vendors to feel beat up on. There are some very good ones in fact that are very professional.

Having worked with other vendors before striking out on our own, I would say that the buyer scams happen at a minimum of 1 out of every 10 transactions. Some are boilerplate as if taken from a playbook. With enough experience, you can see it and put a proper stop to it before it pupates and sprouts wings. Others are more elaborate. You have to admire the more clever scams some buyers pull. They put a great deal of effort into them. And sometimes you may not realize it until you're in resolutions. And then you want to slap yourself unconscious as hindsight readies the gimp ball to stuff in your mouth in preparation for what comes next. 

On the other hand, the vendor scamming the buyer happens slightly or far more often than the buyer scamming the vendor. Depending on your point of view of course. Some seller scams are not scams at all but are the result of poor planning and/or poor record keeping. Not that records should be kept beyond the point of received feedback. At least not unencrypted. Vendors who request or accept FE inadvertently trigger the need for off site record keeping since an order that is FE'd is removed from the order roster on a SR's vendor account page which lists orders shipped or waiting to be. Buyers should be made aware that FE may add an additional privacy risk due to the nature of how SR's vending system was not designed with accounting for FE'd orders in mind. In order for a vendor to remember/reference your order he has to keep records off site. Who knows how they do. Could be hand written, printed out, put into a spreadsheet like Excel, copied and pasted into a text file. (We have a method of encrypting them in the event that a customer FE's of his or her own accord - protecting the buyer's privacy, protects our own).

It's not my intention to unduly scare buyers. But I would not have them ignorant of the additional risks associated with FE. You risk more than just the coin you forward before receiving your order.

And worse of all, you get vendors who abuse their own product. Some of the worse vendors are those that sell and abuse meth. It's not to disparage meth users as contrary to popular opinion, it is possible to be a casual or occasional meth user.  But they can be some of the most unreliable, unpredictable and obtuse characters around. Though, we do know of 3 excellent meth vendors who sell some exceptional ice at reasonable prices especially when you take into account the purity and potency of their offerings. And all 3 maintain their rightfully deserved 100% rating. Nevertheless, stay in escrow when it comes to meth vendors.

In any event, I fear I'll bore some with my redundancy. I'm merely painting the same picture again having only used different colors.

Lastly, we do plan to form some sort of coalition of vendors that new buyers can rely on to accept their order without being asked to finalize early. There are quite a few vendors out there that would happily accept new and inexperienced buyers with low purchasing statistics. But as it is, you'd have to read every vendor's page who sells what you're looking to obtain. What would take say 20 minutes on the clearnet using broadband, takes an hour using Tor. Imagine how much time and frustration a roster of vendors with links to their SR page would save the new buyer.

Title: Re: On FE: What are your priorities?
Post by: zerik on March 07, 2013, 05:42 am
Thanks. That was probably one of the better posts I have read on the topic yet.

I know that buyer scams happen but I did not know they were that frequent. But, at least those are in resolutions so the FE doesn't come into play.

How often does SR resolutions side with the scam buyer. I would think any vendor can prove via tracking that they shipped to the address given by the customer. I don't want vendors getting screwed either. Unfortunately vendors have there own forum so they don't post about getting scammed here as often as buyers.

I didn't even think of the risk to security and privacy with FE. That is troubling.

I am sure there are absolutely times where bad organization or even ill health can lead to a situation where a buyer feels scammed.

Having a list of vendors willing to work with new people without FE is a good idea and would likely drive new customers to their listings. It would be a win for both sides. I don't know why there is resistance to the idea. 
Title: Re: On FE: What are your priorities?
Post by: Pharmington Rex on March 07, 2013, 06:40 am
Thanks. That was probably one of the better posts I have read on the topic yet.

No, thank you. That's quite flattering.

Quote
How often does SR resolutions side with the scam buyer. I would think any vendor can prove via tracking that they shipped to the address given by the customer. I don't want vendors getting screwed either. Unfortunately vendors have there own forum so they don't post about getting scammed here as often as buyers.

It depends on a number of factors such as the type of product involved, type of buyer scam perpetrated against the seller, the seller's current rating and recent feedback, the buyer's purchasing stats. Generally you can estimate the outcome of a dispute. But there are those very rare times when SR's decisions seem arbitrary and arrived at rather lazily.

And it's not always that SR has to arbitrate between the parties. Buyers and sellers often come to some sort of agreement while in resolutions. But having to be bothered with such a buyer often delays finalization which can affect a vendor's cash flow.

However, one of the larger problems vendors face is the ability of a buyer to hold a vendor hostage with threats of leaving a 1/5 (which carries ever considerable weight relative to the number of total # transactions - the lower the # of transactions, the greater the weight) unless they get what they want. The clever scam buyer knows how to manipulate the situation in their favor and which sort of vendor to target. And they are not easy to detect at the onset. Their favorite vendor to target is one who's ratings may have slipped recently due to a number of reasons or the relatively new seller. The scam buyer will attempt to count himself among those wronged in a somewhat similar way as the most recent negative feedback knowing that the seller cannot afford any more negative feedback. In these instances, a DCN has no protective value because the scam buyer is relying on the fact that product was delivered. They then simply claim that what was delivered is not what they ordered or was advertized. Going so far as claiming that use of the product made them very ill.  And given the inherent anonymity of conducting business on SR, it's not as if the seller can ask the buyer to return the product. So what usually happens is that the scam buyer demands a reshipment or else they will leave a 1/5. Free drugs for the scam buyer. Break even or loss for the seller.   

Quote
Having a list of vendors willing to work with new people without FE is a good idea and would likely drive new customers to their listings. It would be a win for both sides. I don't know why there is resistance to the idea.

I didn't notice any resistance to the idea. But if there is, it would likely be because of an unfair advantage such a list would bestow upon its members. Much like how the list of reliable reviewers can give an unfair advantage to those on the list. 
Title: Re: On FE: What are your priorities?
Post by: XXXotica on March 07, 2013, 11:36 am
Buyer scamming happens EVERY SINGLE DAY. Ive only been here a month as a vendor and I receive MANY suspicious, scam messages as well as buys. Ive been threatened with feedback blackmail etc. and I like to view myself as an individual who is as professional as they get. Dont get me wrong, when I was a frequent buyer I was scammed ONCE in over a year. Vendors scams, for the most part, are avoidable (Dont FE ever, test product for legitimacy). There are no signs for a vendor to scope a buyer scam. The buyer stats are just as worthless as the vendor stats. Theres not statistic that shows how many vendors a customer swindled out of free product through feedback blackmail. Or how much of a headache/ unprofessional a buyer is. I converse with 3 other vendors who deal with buyer scams over half-dozen times a week, if not more. The notion that scamming is coming from mainly vendors couldnt be any more absurd. The difference is if a vendor were to post about a buyer scammer, there would be a trillion post about people you dont even know exist. When a vendor scams, EVERYONE knows the vendor, making it a huge spectacle.

If you truly want vendors to stop asking for FE. STOP FUCKING FINALIZING EARLY. It doesnt get any simpler than that.

Just as much as people call for someone to stop FE,  their are flaws in the system for the vendors as well that prevent a better SR.

1. Vendors should be able to leave feedback on buyers just as buyers leave feedback on vendors.
This would eliminate alot of the feedback blackmail from buyers as well as letting vendors better select who they conduct business with, in turn giving vendors NO EXCUSE to ask for FE.

2. The scoring system needs to be adjusted.
A single 1/5 SHOULD NOT drop a vendors score 5+%. This goes back to #1 vendor blackmail would be combated better seeing as many vendors fall victim to this tactic.

3. Vendor feedback should not be able to be changed up to 3 months. (Get a trend here? Another blackmail loophole tactic)

4. A statistic on buyer finalization time.
Believe or not, people dont necessarily care to wait 2 weeks to get paid for a product that has been consumed already. To me, it has nothing to do with freeing up money. Its simple respect, professionalism, and common courtesy in which I personally believe in so I feel a type of way when a buyer for no reason at all just takes forever to finalize.

5. Shorter Auto- Finalization time.
This kinda goes with #4, obviously this would be a problem with overseas orders but the due time can EASILY be extended in the resolution center.

And no, believe it or not SR support is not on the side of the vendors, they're actually pretty unbiased.

SR is not perfect for the buyer or vendor. There are larger issues(like more servers so it doesnt take everyone a million refreshes to log on) that should be attended to than babysitting adults who dont care to use a perfectly fine escrow system that is at their fingertips.

Seriously, come on.
Title: Re: On FE: What are your priorities?
Post by: bill417 on March 07, 2013, 01:02 pm
and I like to view myself as an individual who is as professional as they get....
If you truly want vendors to stop asking for FE. STOP FUCKING FINALIZING EARLY.

Just a bit of advice - nobody is as professional as they get as long as they use swear words - as there simply isn't any need! But I agree with what you're saying, "if nobody FE'd then nobody would ask for FE".
However...
This doesn't deal with the issue. Any problem that arises in any walk of life, you should want to resolve. And the only way to resolve a problem is to find out how the problem arises in the first place. If no vendor ever asked for FE (the source of the problem) then no buyer would actually FE (the problem). Any issue always starts somewhere - and I cannot help but feel that if we want FE eradicated, it's down to the vendors.
There's nothing wrong with educating people better and I think we should, not to FE and move onto other buyers, but as I think "raiders" put it well - lots of people are eager-beavers, and I can't blame them for being unbelievably excited that they can order drugs online. They should do more research though... mandatory buyers guide upon signup springs to mind. 

Quote
1. Vendors should be able to leave feedback on buyers just as buyers leave feedback on vendors.
This would eliminate alot of the feedback blackmail from buyers as well as letting vendors better select who they conduct business with, in turn giving vendors NO EXCUSE to ask for FE.


Seems like a good idea up until the point regarding my recent transaction, I'll explain without going into too much depth;-
I foolishly placed an order for 1.5oz of Cannabis without reading the entirety of the vendors page, which did state that I'd have to FE. I didn't know this until the vendor asked me to FE, of which I did do so. When the package finally went out (told different days in different messages), I thought that considering I was forced to FE despite my statistics (my own fault due to not reading) but as he'd lied about the package being sent out on three occasions, I'd leave feedback. Before doing so, as I had mentioned my stats and how I thought FE was silly, the same vendor, just two days after me ordering, changed profile to say that FE wasn't required.
So I left a 1/5 to reflect this (dishonest, forced FE - not asked, in result of these two, lack of sincere consideration for buyer).
The message I receive back were two words, quoted, "fuck you", in a single message as a response to my 1/5. I had intended to re-review my 1/5 rating upon receipt of the package to a 5/5 or 4/5 but considering that lack of disrespect, my rating remained the same, which I think is only fair.

If the customer is always right, which they should be in every walk of life, then I shouldn't feel that I'm the bad guy, in the wrong. If sellers can also leave feedback, would he then do a 1/5 in retaliation?
I'd think that there would be a Resolution Centre for Feedback disputes. In this case, DPR needs to recruit.

Quote
2. The scoring system needs to be adjusted.
A single 1/5 SHOULD NOT drop a vendors score 5+%. This goes back to #1 vendor blackmail would be combated better seeing as many vendors fall victim to this tactic.

A single 1/5 doesn't always drop scores by 5% or more. The % drop is entirely dependent on how many transactions you've done, with how many 5/5 ratings (if we assume dropping from 100). BUT, I do believe that there should be a more explanation in the feedback, or more scores to rate on, IE:- Communication, Postage and Packaging, Product and Overall Satisfaction.

Quote
3. Vendor feedback should not be able to be changed up to 3 months. (Get a trend here? Another blackmail loophole tactic)

They changed it a few months ago... Originally you could change the feedback you gave to a vendor from any transaction, even a year ago. However, because anonymity issues were raised with the past feedback linking to an individual, it was thought best to expire any feedback over 3 months old, and I personally think this is probably the better option.

With regards to people not finalising in a timely manner - this should not be a problem with packages that are tracked. Even for domestic shipments containing totally legal products, I ask for my mail to be "Recorded" (DCN) so that I know when the package has been received. Surely, if the buyer isn't being as respectful as they should finalising as soon as they receive, all it takes is a very quick message from the vendor to ask for finalisation? It shouldn't be necessary, I understand, but these circumstances should, surely, be few and far between.
Title: Re: On FE: What are your priorities?
Post by: TheGoodSon on March 07, 2013, 01:39 pm
@Bill

Umm, just so you know, you won't find many vendors who won't say "fuck you" if you leave a 1/5, even "temporarily" because you didn't read the listing. I personally find that insulting that you are making the vendor pay for your incompetence.
Title: Re: On FE: What are your priorities?
Post by: bill417 on March 07, 2013, 06:54 pm
There's a lot more to it than what I stated, I could have gone into further details but I hadn't. The vendor had contacted me a few days ago and with due consideration, I upped the rating to a 2/5.

If you leave a 1/5, the vendor should be concerned, asking if there's anything they could do to have that changed. That's the professional way to do it, just as if you were to leave negative reviews about a postal company or ebay, amazon, etc etc.

The vendor isn't paying in any shape or form. Their rating is currently 98. They still have many successful transactions every day it seems. The vendor totally disrespected the buyer hence my comments. Why should I be made out to be the bad guy?

And if I was to vend on here and somebody left me a 1/5, I certainly wouldn't say "fuck you". In fact, I'd close shop before I went to insulting anybody.
Title: Re: On FE: What are your priorities?
Post by: TheGoodSon on March 07, 2013, 07:09 pm
If you wish to invoke the "way professionals work" clause..

You're wrong..

The way professionals work is to assume a 5/5 transaction until proven otherwise. A 1/5 transaction score (even F/E) says "you're a scammer.. just TRY to prove me wrong".

I don't care if the vendor cussed you for for 10 pages because you didn't read that you had to F/E...

leaving a 1/5 and then "upping it" to 2/5 is just pathetic.. especially if the vendor came through.
Title: Re: On FE: What are your priorities?
Post by: XXXotica on March 07, 2013, 07:40 pm
and I like to view myself as an individual who is as professional as they get....
If you truly want vendors to stop asking for FE. STOP FUCKING FINALIZING EARLY.

Just a bit of advice - nobody is as professional as they get as long as they use swear words - as there simply isn't any need! But I agree with what you're saying, "if nobody FE'd then nobody would ask for FE".
However...
This doesn't deal with the issue. Any problem that arises in any walk of life, you should want to resolve. And the only way to resolve a problem is to find out how the problem arises in the first place. If no vendor ever asked for FE (the source of the problem) then no buyer would actually FE (the problem). Any issue always starts somewhere - and I cannot help but feel that if we want FE eradicated, it's down to the vendors.
There's nothing wrong with educating people better and I think we should, not to FE and move onto other buyers, but as I think "raiders" put it well - lots of people are eager-beavers, and I can't blame them for being unbelievably excited that they can order drugs online. They should do more research though... mandatory buyers guide upon signup springs to mind. 

Quote
1. Vendors should be able to leave feedback on buyers just as buyers leave feedback on vendors.
This would eliminate alot of the feedback blackmail from buyers as well as letting vendors better select who they conduct business with, in turn giving vendors NO EXCUSE to ask for FE.


Seems like a good idea up until the point regarding my recent transaction, I'll explain without going into too much depth;-
I foolishly placed an order for 1.5oz of Cannabis without reading the entirety of the vendors page, which did state that I'd have to FE. I didn't know this until the vendor asked me to FE, of which I did do so. When the package finally went out (told different days in different messages), I thought that considering I was forced to FE despite my statistics (my own fault due to not reading) but as he'd lied about the package being sent out on three occasions, I'd leave feedback. Before doing so, as I had mentioned my stats and how I thought FE was silly, the same vendor, just two days after me ordering, changed profile to say that FE wasn't required.
So I left a 1/5 to reflect this (dishonest, forced FE - not asked, in result of these two, lack of sincere consideration for buyer).
The message I receive back were two words, quoted, "fuck you", in a single message as a response to my 1/5. I had intended to re-review my 1/5 rating upon receipt of the package to a 5/5 or 4/5 but considering that lack of disrespect, my rating remained the same, which I think is only fair.

If the customer is always right, which they should be in every walk of life, then I shouldn't feel that I'm the bad guy, in the wrong. If sellers can also leave feedback, would he then do a 1/5 in retaliation?
I'd think that there would be a Resolution Centre for Feedback disputes. In this case, DPR needs to recruit.

Quote
2. The scoring system needs to be adjusted.
A single 1/5 SHOULD NOT drop a vendors score 5+%. This goes back to #1 vendor blackmail would be combated better seeing as many vendors fall victim to this tactic.

A single 1/5 doesn't always drop scores by 5% or more. The % drop is entirely dependent on how many transactions you've done, with how many 5/5 ratings (if we assume dropping from 100). BUT, I do believe that there should be a more explanation in the feedback, or more scores to rate on, IE:- Communication, Postage and Packaging, Product and Overall Satisfaction.

Quote
3. Vendor feedback should not be able to be changed up to 3 months. (Get a trend here? Another blackmail loophole tactic)

They changed it a few months ago... Originally you could change the feedback you gave to a vendor from any transaction, even a year ago. However, because anonymity issues were raised with the past feedback linking to an individual, it was thought best to expire any feedback over 3 months old, and I personally think this is probably the better option.

With regards to people not finalising in a timely manner - this should not be a problem with packages that are tracked. Even for domestic shipments containing totally legal products, I ask for my mail to be "Recorded" (DCN) so that I know when the package has been received. Surely, if the buyer isn't being as respectful as they should finalising as soon as they receive, all it takes is a very quick message from the vendor to ask for finalisation? It shouldn't be necessary, I understand, but these circumstances should, surely, be few and far between.

No offense Bill, you seem like a loyal and concerned community member but you essentially just gave an example of idiotic stuff alot of vendors deal with. You agreed to FE by purchasing the listing, then give a 1/5 because you finalized early? I understand the vendor may have changed his stipulations to appease his business for the future but how does that warrant a 1/5? Thats ridiculous. A 1/5 will drop your score significantly unless your have well over 300 transactions, Bill. As we know, nobody likes ordering from a vendor under a certain percentage so essentially a person who leaves a 1/5, because they agreed with the vendor to FE on an order and changed their mind on the ethics of it (still dont get that one), can effect a vendors business significantly.
Title: Re: On FE: What are your priorities?
Post by: Pharmington Rex on March 08, 2013, 10:29 pm
Buyer scamming happens EVERY SINGLE DAY.

...And they all said, "Amen."

There's quite a bit of brilliancy on your part that follows:

Quote
1. Vendors should be able to leave feedback on buyers just as buyers leave feedback on vendors.
This would eliminate alot of the feedback blackmail from buyers as well as letting vendors better select who they conduct business with, in turn giving vendors NO EXCUSE to ask for FE.

You know, and this is interesting;  eBay recognized this problem quite a few years ago and addressed it. But they did it to stop vendors from holding buyers hostage with feedback blackmail.

I don't think it would serve SR to implement a buyer feedback system in the same manner as the vendor feedback system. While it may seem to level the playing field, it in fact only does so by way of MAD. (Mutually assured destruction.) In other words, nuke my rating, I nuke yours. This would give rogue vendors a critical advantage to use against relatively new buyers whose score would be affected to a greater degree by a 1/5 than a veteran buyer.

Scenario to illustrate:

Rogue vendor literally sends buyer a package of sea salt crystals marked "A1 Meth - mindfucker extraordinaire. Orgasm x 10000 - without even touching yourself! I shit you not!" LOL - you get my point.
Now, the buyer tries to smoke it, eat it, snort it. Nothing. No effect. So he complains to the rogue vendor, "dude, you sold me shit! WFT? Send me real product or give me my money back. I'm leaving a 1/5 if you don't!"
Vendor responds," nope. you got what you paid for. Now Sod off you left handed, red headed step child son of a whore. I'm busy. Or I'll leave you 1/5 feedback. Take this to resolutions and I swear to Ja, the God of the Rastafarians, that I'll leave a 1/5 and a comment about what a douchless, putrid puss dripping flytrap of a twat scam buyer you are. "

Yeah, no,  seriously that's how some vendors talk. Vortexmilkman used to come at his customers like that.

So, yeah, I reject the idea of a buyer feedback system in that regard. However, What I think would help is allowing a vendor the opportunity to rebut the feedback left by a buyer.

For instance, take the usual scam buyer 1/5 feedback that claims, "scammer selling bunk product. Stay away!"
Now imagine if a seller were able to rebut that right under that feedback to say, "Odd that this is the only customer claiming bunk product while the others rave about it."

That should be sufficient for giving potential buyers who actually read feedback, pause to consider.

Another helpful metric matrix which would be nice is to show a buyer's number of transactions, refund rate, and... a tier for the amount they spent.
Vendors already see the first two when a buyer places an order. But if they could also see the amount spent, not as an actual to somewhat protect the privacy of the buyer, but a tier to represent the amount the buyer spent. If he spent up to $1000USD then that would be L1. Up to$2500, L2. Up to $4000, L3 and so on and so forth.

If a buyer presents to us with only 6 transactions, but total spent was >$2000, I wouldn't place any limitations on him. 

Quote
2. The scoring system needs to be adjusted.
A single 1/5 SHOULD NOT drop a vendors score 5+%. This goes back to #1 vendor blackmail would be combated better seeing as many vendors fall victim to this tactic.

Yes agreed. It should be given a weight based on the amount of the transaction. A piker buying 5 pills for $30 who leaves a 1/5 should not carry the same damaging weight as a high roller buying semi bulk dissatisfied with some aspect of a purchase who leaves a 2/5. Consider that the piker can also be your competition willing to spend $30 to ruin your rating.

It has happened.

Quote
3. Vendor feedback should not be able to be changed up to 3 months. (Get a trend here? Another blackmail loophole tactic)


Agreed. You will pardon my French, but yes, this is bullshite. Absolute bullocks. 4 weeks max. (And this is for a vendor to make things right to change a 1/5 to a 5/5.)

Cheap-arsed buyer: I've been smoking this fantastic bud for weeks and now that I'm all out I've determined that it sucks. No, not the weed, but the fact that I'm out of it. So I will go back to the vendor and buy more... for a discount of course. One that I wish to impose as a returning customer. If he doesn't comply with my unreasonable request to pay 1/3 of what I paid before, I will threaten to change my 7 week old feedback to a 1/5. He should come to realize what's cheaper? Selling me weed at a slight loss to please me or lose potential customers after I change my feedback to a 1/5 and his rating drops like a rock?. Fuck it. I'm doing him a favor and he better see it as such.

-The privileged generation. Circa 2012.

Quote
4. A statistic on buyer finalization time.
Believe or not, people dont necessarily care to wait 2 weeks to get paid for a product that has been consumed already. To me, it has nothing to do with freeing up money. Its simple respect, professionalism, and common courtesy in which I personally believe in so I feel a type of way when a buyer for no reason at all just takes forever to finalize.

Brilliant.

Quote
5. Shorter Auto- Finalization time.
This kinda goes with #4, obviously this would be a problem with overseas orders but the due time can EASILY be extended in the resolution center.

Brilliant again. If an order is flagged domestic, then an auto-finalize of 9 days. Foreign? 17 days. Exception, sent via a service known to delivery foreign shipments on under 5 days. For these orders, AF in 12 days.

Quote
And no, believe it or not SR support is not on the side of the vendors, they're actually pretty unbiased.

They have their moments when they can be held up as the shining examples of justice.
But overall, I would agree that they are fair. Except when they are lazy or if they just don't like you because you make them have to read too much. :)


We should be friends. Drop in our inbox at your leisure and give us a word or two.
Title: Re: On FE: What are your priorities?
Post by: zerik on March 08, 2013, 11:18 pm
The situation you described where a vendor lied about shipping, failed to ship timely does warrent less than a 5/5 rate. A 1/5 seems a bit harsh to me though. I don't know the whole story.

You did agree to FE so I don't know how you can take points off for that. If a vendor contacted me and asked to FE than I would have just asked him to cancel my order then.

How long did he take to ship? 

Vendor and buyer scams happen but FE hardly helps the situation. It can actually make a situation worse.
Title: Re: On FE: What are your priorities?
Post by: bill417 on March 12, 2013, 10:54 pm
Buying the listing isn't an automatic agreement that you've read the sellers terms and conditions. I mistakenly missed a part of their profile, before ordering and take full responsibility for that, but wasn't given any option to cancel, as it was moved into transit quickly, by the time I woke the next morning the seller had stated "its ready to go today, finalise please" and this is when, with a bit of a blank face, I realised it'd be too late to go with another vendor as once its in transit it can't be cancelled.

I now not only make sure I've read everything on their page but also copy and paste their entire profile, as well as the listing(s) I'm interested in buying, in case they were to change.

If a vendor demands finalise early, they should be avoided (my mistake for not realising and cancelling), if a vendor asks for FE then you do so at your own risk. And simply because I wouldn't have needed to FE, if I had ordered the day later (as he updated his terms), this of course annoyed me seeing as I could've remained in escrow, the very thing which startled me initially.
I was originally told, when I finalised, it'd go out the same day. (That was a Friday). On the Monday I just asked if he'd managed to get it out, to which he replied he did. Then I found later in the week from the tracking that it had only been dropped off on the Tuesday, going into the system on the Wednesday.
I had also paid for express, and I think it arrived priority. There were also customs charges, risking my life due to the package being scanned - simply because the seller hadn't made the customs declaration I'd asked (which would have, as with other packages, allowed it to pass without issue). At this time, that would have been 2 out of 27 international cannabis orders that were stopped at Customs with extra charges, simply because they hadn't put the correct (and therefore safe for both buyer and seller) information on. Because of being stuck at customs with extra charges, it was delayed in UK customs for a further 3 days.

The other thing that annoyed me was how the seller made me out to be "The Bad Guy" because I hadn't asked for a partial refund because of the delayed shipping, and I was required to point out that the buyer shouldn't ever blackmail - in any sense - to benefit from the deal, and that it should be the vendors responsibility to offer some resolution to the issue.

We'll have to agree to disagree:- I believe it's totally acceptable to leave a 1/5 if you're forced to FE, to then update it upon receipt of products. If not a 1/5 certainly no more than a 3/5, because this should be meaningful to the vendor who could then consider new policies - as obviously customers, and therefore potential customers, are obviously put-off by the requirement of FE.
There also isn't any mandatory requirement to have read any vendors page before ordering - if there is then that vendor really should state it, on all of their listings. Of course, users must respect that if they miss conditions, they themselves are to blame, but if they are not told how can anyone assume that they will? I've now gotten into the habit of reading everything (listing and profile) before ordering, but that's not to say other users won't.
Title: Re: On FE: What are your priorities?
Post by: zerik on March 13, 2013, 12:21 am
Don't get me wrong I am by no means an advocate  of the whole FE thing. I think it should be abolished altogether.

I don't know why he didn't just let you cancel the transaction when you told him you did not want to FE. If a vendor requires this than it should be disclosed clearly by the vendor.

The FE thing sounds like the least of the problems with the transaction. Sounds like the shipping was an even worse nightmare and you did not get the express service you paid for at all.
I am glad you got it ok even if late. Also good to hear the vendor changed his policy on FE. That's good to hear.

This illustrates a huge problem with freeing early. Any glitch and people will feel like they were scammed. Things get out of control from there. The buyer gets scared and contacts the vendor might get defensive and now both parties are pissed off.

At the very least the vendor should have refunded your shipping since that was his/her screw up. You paid for express shipping which you did not receive. Sounds like the stealth leaves much to be desired as well with the vendor not filling out the proper paperwork to ship overseas.

I just think a 1/5 was a bit harsh. If the vendor is otherwise good. That is quite a hit to his stats. Just saying ask yourself if that is a fair rate. (just my opinion) I don't know because I wasn't there. He clearly doesn't deserve a 5/5 either.

However, the FE thing is what you are most pissed off about which kind of makes my point. It can cause more problems than it creates as it did here.

Vendors should be allowed to tell their side of the story when negative feedback is left. It is only fair. I also wish vendors would report attempts to scam them to the forum.

I don't want vendors to be scammed either. I know some will try but I would think a vendor could show he/she shipped to the address provided to them.

For now I think the idea for a list of vendors that do not require FE is a good idea and educating people not to FE. Like someone mentioned if people stop freeing early than vendors will stop asking.

I do see how some small vendors can be hurt by the amount of time a case stays in resolution or the amount of time it takes to auto finalize when a buyer doesn't free funds when product is received.

I still think FE should be abolished since it is used so much to scam people and that will eventually hurt the reputation of SR.

Title: Re: On FE: What are your priorities?
Post by: bill417 on March 13, 2013, 01:09 am
Good post, yeah actually the vendor went back to his old policy, which is FE for certain conditions. I was also concerned that he sent a two word message, simply "f*** you' and I thought that was as over the top as you may think my 1/5 rating was. I had some problems with the transaction, and the seller after further communication couldn't understand where he was going wrong - and although I did receive the product yes, it wasn't nearly the best stuff I've had considering the price it was.

Said vendor also doesn't have anybody reviewing his products on the forum, which is further suspect to the 300+ transactions, but make what you will of it.

See, after you've established a reputation with a vendor, for example, my 8 orders from HeartOfHumboldt, then perhaps one should feel inclined to Finalise Early simply as a sign of gratitude and trust. Nevertheless, SR are still going to be taking a percentage from the transactions anyway, so may as well make use of Escrow and Resolution Centre in the event of any mishaps.


EDITED - Wow, you know that vendor I was talking about... apparently gone... Now I'm not bothered about any 1 or 2/5 rating...

Quote
That scumbag ripped off everyone, recently, then closed his vendor account.

Well his account still seems to be active, but with one notice on their profile:-

Quote
Me, my friends, and family are getting out of the drug business. We are going legit. Take my advice. Stop wasting your life with drugs. There is more to life than getting high and making money. I wish you all the best.
Title: Re: On FE: What are your priorities?
Post by: zerik on March 13, 2013, 03:23 am
It sounds like a lot was going on with the transaction. Communication, quality, shipping and security. Sound like he quit anyway but still you should create a review thread for the vendor and hear what other customers have to say.

A review can be changed up to 3 mo after the transaction? I wonder what the reason for that is? Like I said I don't want vendors taking hits either.

We will never eliminate scammers but it should be a lot harder for them to thrive. Even with escrow scams happen on both sides. It's even harder to curb scams on an anonymous market.

But this is a good conversation. Too bad it was interrupted by the down time.
Title: Re: On FE: What are your priorities?
Post by: shimbabwe on March 15, 2013, 06:08 pm
I think it is working pretty good right now. People front drugs all the time this is just like in reverse though. You front the money first and get the drugs later.
Title: Re: On FE: What are your priorities?
Post by: zerik on March 16, 2013, 08:04 am
Anyway, we kind of strayed off topic a bit.

Right now all we can do is try to educate people about the dangers of freeing early.

I still think the list of vendors is a good idea.

Also good to hear from vendors as well. If vendors concerns are addressed then they would be more willing to work with new peope without Fe.

Not every new person is a scammer or just a nightmare to deal with.
Nor is every vendor that asks for FE. Vendors do have a legit beef in s lot of cases. I am sympathetic to their difficulties. Nor do I want to see a vendor and customer who know another and choose to Fe for what ever reason.

I just don't want to see the forums or Sr become like topix. Though I don't think we could ever get that bad. I hope not anyway.