I had a mutual cancellation for my exam.
The buyer was agreed to cancel the order, so I opened a dispute and canceled. (there were no feedback option for us).
From that experience, all I know is,
If the buyer cancels an order, a negative feedback will automatically include on sellers profile which is not removable and if bot party cancels the order mutually, no feedback option will appear in that order.
However, mutual cancellation is bad as the cancellation for gigs.
“may not solicit the removal” == “may not request to remove” == “may not ask to removal” == “may not beg the removal” == “may not argue the removal”… whatever, just take this as a light sentence (mystery solved)
Unfortunately I can only give a speculative answer. Anything to do with ToS should be checked with CS as mods do not have the authority to “interpret” ToS. Please don’t base any decisions on this.
In the first instance: A cancellation which is mutually agreed (in the first sense) means that both seller and buyer agree that the work wasn’t/won’t/can’t be done correctly etc - meaning that a cancellation is fair and both buyer and seller see this as the best solution. This is allowed.
In the second instance: A cancellation based on the seller seeking out the cancellation solely in return for feedback removal (and not because the work wasn’t/won’t/can’t be done). This is not allowed.
Even if this is correct, it is difficult and a fine line to be watched. In these circumstances, I would ALWAYS suggest that customer support is involved from the beginning. This is because it is better to not have the feedback removed than to risk your account by doing something that isn’t allowed.
There was also a discussion about this relatively recently with some other insights/points.
I reported something similar as a bug, see below. Since your post reminded me of that I went to check, it´s still not changed yet.
I think it´s probably really just bad wording sometimes than real meaning, like they use both review and rating and sometimes it seems as if the one is the public and the other the private one, but then again it seems to just be random, maybe it depends on whether the same person wrote an article from finish to end and nobody else changed it who didn´t think of choosing exact and unambiguous wording and didn´t check for consistency with other articles on the same topic written by others. A case of too many cooks, if you will.
In your example, I´d assume there´s a different ‘quality’ attributed to the mutual cancellation per the ‘solicit’, similar to what Eoin says, I guess, we know that there are cases where the feedback can be removed, though we know it seems to be a rare thing now, and the thin line is the solicit, I think.
On the other hand though, it could simply be that the first part was copypasted and shouldn´t be there or something, too. Who knows.
Yeah, I thought the same of being copy-pasted, or even left like that from past times where sellers were allowed to remove feedback through cancellations, and Fiverr forgot to update that. A case of too many cooks, indeed, couldn’t have said it any better myself