  
| Author: | jadonut  | | Posted: | Jul 19, 2018 20:04 | | Subject: | Re: Separating “buyer” and “seller” reviews | | Viewed: | 45 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, jadonut writes:
Just to clarify, I’m having my own negative experience with this user myself.
I paid for a $120 set four days ago, messaged him the day after I paid since
there was no response. He replied the next day saying he’d ship today, which
he hasn’t. For such an expensive set, I’d rather not have to wait five days after
making a payment to see it ship. Kind of upsetting.
| | A bricklink user may be an A + buyer but a mediocre seller. I’m dealing with
a seller who’s had bad reviews, ranging from water and crush damage to an order
that was cancelled without explanation. But this user has stellar buyer reviews
that reflect his overall rating.
If there’s not already, there should be a way to filter between these two types
of reviews so that users aren’t stuck with a bad seller who’s being advertised
so positively from their reviews as a buyer.
|
|
|
Message is in Reply To:  Separating “buyer” and “seller” reviews - jadonut (18)  | A bricklink user may be an A + buyer but a mediocre seller. I’m dealing with a seller who’s had bad reviews, ranging from water and crush damage to an order that was cancelled [...]
(72 months ago, Jul 19, 2018, to Suggestions) |
Message Has 1 Reply: 6 Messages in this Thread: Msg 1 - jadonut (18) 72 months ago Jul 19, 2018 to Suggestions
 Msg 2 « - jadonut (18) 72 months ago Jul 19, 2018 to Suggestions
  Msg 3 - LaineeP (2194) 72 months ago Jul 19, 2018 to Suggestions
Msg 4 - jadonut (18) 72 months ago Jul 19, 2018 to Suggestions
Msg 5 - calsbricks (8542) 72 months ago Jul 20, 2018 to Suggestions
Msg 6 - NelisSolis (3753) 72 months ago Jul 20, 2018 to Suggestions
Entire thread on one page
This message and all its replies on one page
|
|
USA, Oregon
