Fiverr Forum

Suggestion for Fiverr - "Rejection of Work" is also a "Request for Cancellation"


#1

A few buyers use the “Rejection of Work” box to lock a seller into something they don’t do, and often use the threat of “I don’t want to leave negative feedback, but I will…unless you…” and more or less at that point extort the seller.



I would suggest that “Rejection of Work” be a special case of “Request for Cancellation”.



That is it’s a request with a “second chance”. At that point, the seller can decide to resubmit with the feedback (when it’s sincere, accurate, useful AND agreeable).



There’s never a time that “rejection of work” happens for a lack of work. So in all cases, it’s a “re-request” for more work. Consequently, a seller should have a chance to say, “Actually this is a buyer I want to also reject. They don’t get me, the gig, etc. Or even, I’m busy now and don’t have the time. The reason is immaterial.



This should be a simple coding task for someone familiar with the site and who knows what s/he is doing. After all, it’s going to simple be adding either timer (like mutual cancellation requesting has) and/or adding an extra choice that already exists for a seller. (I will resubmit work / I prefer to mutually cancel the gig”


#2

That sounds like a breeding ground for abuse. I’ve had a few Buyers try to “reject” for the sake of free graphics and end up seller hopping to get free site content.


#3

NoBlerab, while I agree that rejection of work is already able to be abused in the way you speak, how would giving the POWER to the SELLER to cancel an order at that point help buyers abuse sellers.



It really couldn’t/wouldn’t in that sense unless you mean in the way that in a normal request for cancellation there’s a 2 day clock?



I’m saying, only this



Buyer rejects work, gives you a bunch of BS that is not really part of your gig anyway, so you get to send them on their way. That’s all.



#4

Well say I get an order to make a 400px by 400px red circle. I deliver that exactly. Buyer tries to cancel and get a refund to get an image for free. I think there should be an option on the Seller’s end to give that Buyer a black mark to warn others they might be hopping to to do the same thing all over again. Because it really should be taken into consideration that you’re not just buying original content, you’re compensating someone for their time on your project.


#5

So to be clear, you’re talking about something totally different, yes?



Let’s be clear: There is “already” nothing to allow that.



I’m only suggesting changing someone who rejects your work to allow a seller to say, "Look if you don’t want what I’ve delivered, we’re done and cancel the order"



Right now, we’re at a point in the world were a buyer can reject our work and FORCE us to build more…



I agree with your other points, Noble, just that’s there not actually relevant to this.



In other words, can you please recant your previous comment that “my idea” is an area ripe for abuse.


#6

No, because it still is. It just makes it easier for refunds to be given to scammers. If a buyer rejects to try and coerce more work, there is nothing stopping the Seller from tapping the deliver button again with no upload and reporting the offender. Fiverr customer service is pretty good about taking down bad feedback. I think instead of mutual cancellation being made easier, the system should allow for the Buyer to have more power to say “Hey, you’re not getting off scot free with a refund.”


#7

I have no problem with BOTH and…



What I do question, in general, is assuming that a fool is a scammer. I think people at times expect too much, but they’re not “thinking though the rules” to find a way to get out of $5.



All that said, I have no problem with BOTH… But I want to be able to say to someone who rejects my work, “Bye bye.” I’m not sure HOW you can disagree with that?


#8
  1. 2 mutual cancellation buttons is redundant and isn’t much of a fix.
  2. Would you be okay with refunding a large sum after doing the work and finding out they were doing the same to others?
  3. It happens more than you think. I explained Blackhatting to you in another thread. The internet tends to operate on a different set of rules.
  4. There’s really no reason for another mutual cancellation button when customer service can be alerted about a bullying Buyer, or the Seller can just keep delivering blanks until their terms are met. I’ve dealt with this a few times and have the proof that they were artist hopping. The above method worked wonders.



    Image and video hosting by TinyPic

#9

NobleRab,



What I’m saying is these are separate issues.



You’re trying to optimize for cheats.



I’m trying to optimize for people you don’t want to work with AGAIN.



Finally, you say there’s not “need” for a rudundant button.



Well, it’s not. One is a button ALLOWING you to redo the work if you want and cancel if you don’t. The other is a request to cancel (perhaps they were confused when they ordered and they don’t even want you to “try again”).



Likewise, while you CAN reach out to CS. I prefer to not have to do so. Someone is paying for CS. I don’t know if it’s hourly and more tickets is not an incremental issue. But at some point, more tickets will mean more employees even at hourly. And if it’s per ticket basis, in any way, the more things we can resolve ourselves the better.



Again, you’re claiming I’m not “fixing” your problem that you’ve identified. And I agree, but it does fix my problem :slight_smile:



Think about it… Right now, if someone rejects work (and isn’t scamming) your only option is for FORCE the cancellation (which hurts your rating) or redo the work (which you may not want to to do).



All, I’m suggesting AND FOR THIS REASON / PROBLEM only (not all problems) is that when someone rejects the work, a SELLER can cancel without penalty.



There’s NO reason to oppose that.


#10

Well if Fiverr was based only on your comfort, I might be more inclined to agree with you. But what you’re trying to fix is a non issue as long as customer service exists. And there’s nothing wrong with CS giving more people hourly jobs. This is a forum for discussion. Not everyone is going to agree with you and think your ideas are golden. I still say it’d be a waste of coding especially for people who are just starting out and may not be able to afford dismissing Buyers so quickly and who think fair work deserves fair compensation. And you’re wrong about the whole “force cancellation” thing. I’ve mentioned twice how to circumvent that with a little patience and innovation. I’ll oppose whatever I like, especially when it’s something that’s like putting a Band-Aid on a leaking dam.



Image and video hosting by TinyPic


#11

I don’t expect agreement. I would like not to have my position represented as a strawman. NO, this is “not” just about “my comfort”. And, that’s a decidedly uncool attack.



Worse, you seem to be saying that “when considering comfort” …a new, less productive seller is a more important person to whom to give succor than me. Which is totally illogical question begging. Especially since, no “new seller” wants to remain in “survival mode” they want to get to the point you seem to see me as speaking from the privilege of.



While, I don’t expect you (everyone or anyone) to agree.



I will not consider fallacious equivocation to be compelling. And, even if you do make a cogent argument, you might not be at all surprised to know that I may still not be convinced.



Now, let’s see to any substance in your retort.



You raise a ‘waste’ of Coding time.



Well, this is a case where even if you’re right in fact you’ve misapplied in principle. The marginal coding time is essentially zero.



The process to cancel already exists. The button already exists. You simply now give the seller the same button that already exists as an option. All coding is simply to allow the option. All other coding is to call to an existing subroutine.



By your argument, we don’t need “mutual cancellation” at all or never needed it. After all we had Customer Service. But again, since we already have it, calling it again is not much more work.



To argue that there is “nothing wrong” with CS giving more people hourly jobs is to fall into the fallacy of “breaking a window” improves the economy. Of course, it’s a GOOD thing to add more CS jobs…as the over all site grow.



I’ve not in any way said anything that would reduce that… But coding is paid for once, CS all the time. So the more and more things Fiverr automates the better for itself in general.



You’ve tried to suggest that I don’t believe that “fair work” deserves “fair pay”. Again, this is a strawman version of my position. I’ve said nothing like that. NOR DOES the OPTION to cancel someone who rejects your work mean you MUST CANCEL it.



Maybe you thought I was saying that if they reject and you don’t respond for 2 days it’s Automatically canceled… I don’t mean that. I mean that the SELLER can cancel.



Are you saying, and if so, this is very interesting…



Are you saying that if you provide work.



A buyer rejects it.



That you can go to customer service, they’ll set the gig as delivered, let you keep the money, and NOT give new work to a buyer? And, even if that is so, couldn’t the buyer just leave negative feedback?



I cannot imagine, from what I’ve seen, that Customer Service is a solution to “NOT” doing the work again. And it seems to me DOING the work AGAIN is not getting fair pair for your time and work. … which seemed to be your main position?



Dude, I didn’t say you COULDN’T oppose whatever you want.



I said, there’s no ‘reason’ to. And you’ve proven that again with you post that lacks any coherent opposition.



And, as far as you claim that one is trivial verses a “leaking damn” … I think one might want to look closely into the mirror of making a post about your own person situation and privilege.



I’ve never had anyone to my knowledge use me to get free work done. Maybe you get a lot of that, and if so, by all mean start a thread and ask for the changes you want.



This is a thread I started for this issue. I’d like to keep it on topic, please.


#12

Not a strawman, just someone whose done programming and website design work.



"Likewise, while you CAN reach out to CS. I prefer to not have to do so. Someone is paying for CS."



That’s how it works.



"Think about it… Right now, if someone rejects work (and isn’t scamming) your only option is for FORCE the cancellation (which hurts your rating) or redo the work (which you may not want to to do)."



Nope. You can redeliver, but not upload anything and reinforce your terms. If they leave negative feedback, you can contact CS with a chat log and get it removed.



"What I do question, in general, is assuming that a fool is a scammer. I think people at times expect too much, but they’re not “thinking though the rules” to find a way to get out of $5. "



Image and video hosting by TinyPic



"All that said, I have no problem with BOTH… But I want to be able to say to someone who rejects my work, “Bye bye.” I’m not sure HOW you can disagree with that?"



Because you can say “Bye Bye” without adding yet ANOTHER button which is a duplicate. How about INSTEAD of adding that, the button be one that allows you to black mark the bad buyer…so other Sellers can be forewarned…like a super rate button. Or it just sends the gig log to CS so that account can be investigated (like that little block thing in the inbox.) It’d do more than just mutually rejecting the order and them getting a refund and whatever files you sent.



"And, as far as you claim that one is trivial verses a “leaking damn” … I think one might want to look closely into the mirror of making a post about your own person situation and privilege. "



Because despite a myriad of “disabilities” that allow me to have a white cane at night, the ability to sign, Autism Speaks trying to fix me and a nice straddle on the poverty line with my Native wife and settled privilege…I somehow don’t have this problem with rejected orders. Call it luck or creativity…but I’ve managed to get it sorted without tapping a button to lose money for work. I also mentioned several times how it could be better handled. I don’t need to make a post about my problems until they become too much to handle. So pretty please. Tell me more about my “privilege.” Every teenage girl on Tumblr has.



Part of being on topic is suggesting alternatives and/or why a suggestion isn’t efficient.



Image and video hosting by TinyPic



#13

Who’s that guy behind the love?



Also: Because you can say “Bye Bye” without adding yet ANOTHER button which is a duplicate. How about INSTEAD of adding that, the button be one that allows you to black mark the bad buyer…so other Sellers can be forewarned…like a super rate button. Or it just sends the gig log to CS so that account can be investigated (like that little block thing in the inbox.) It’d do more than just mutually rejecting the order and them getting a refund and whatever files you sent.



–> I like that/this.



Were you being sincere? Or just like most “white men” when a call to check their privilege is raised? Do you have autism. I set a goal for 2012 to make an autistic / Asperger’s syndrome d/xed friend this year. So far, I did the latter and not the former.



And are you saying you’re also blind? If so, are you very near sighted, or otherwise how do you accommodate your vision to your art?



Hopefully, even if you continue to reject my suggestion, you can see I’m “finitely though sufficiently reasonable”, “open to correction” and “generally agreeable if insistent upon rigor and no attack of the disenfranchised.”


#14

That’s Amon…he’s kind of the Guy Fawkes of the Korra universe, I thought you’d get a kick out of it.



And I’m being completely sincere, and I’m severely vision impaired (Near sighted/astigmatism/photosensitivity). I use a cane at night, visual assistance on my comp, glasses–which need to be updated and I adapted to my depth perception issues with studying the colour theory behind depth of field, I’m also HoH and on top of all that I’m pigment challenged XD. If you’re looking to get involved with the Autistic community you should look into the ASAN (Autism Self Advocacy Network). I’m not angry or anything, just a bit of a stickler. :slight_smile:


#15

Thanks for the follow up and I’ll research “Korra” Thanks :slight_smile:


#16

Any time, friend :).


#17

I’ll pitch in my two cents as it seems to be just the two of you discussing: I’d say remove the rejection feature altogether. There lies too great a schism of abuse here that it’s either the Fiverr guys didn’t do enough R&D into all of the uses of this feature, or they did know and willing released it anyway.



What also caught my eye was “Someone is paying for CS.” Yes, WE are paying for CS. What do you think that 20% dividend pays for?


#18

The 20% pays for EVERYTHING.



So if customer service starts to take up more of that $1 per gig. Then fiverr has to raise fees to be profitable.


#19

From what I can see, there’s no questioning the profitability of fiverr. It looks like they’re making much more money that they could possibly spend with the amounts of gigs being made and ordered every minute.

As for CS, they’re probably paid either by salary or on a commission basis, so there’s no need to question that, and to raise the 20% margin would be suicide. 20% seems to be the perfect sweet spot for making profit on both ends of the ecosystem, so I wouldn’t see fiverr making any changes to that any time soon, if at all.


#20

MrM, oh? What is your source? And how does it compare to say Ebay, Amazon, or Google?



When someone who is a micro-entrepreneur says someone else is making enough, I get a little cautious.



Remember, they had to have outside capital to the tune of $20-million in the last 2 years.