I can see where some of the feedback change came from. Sellers often insist no feedback until buyer leaves feedback for the seller. In this way the seller bludgeons the buyer into leaving positive feedback to avoid receiving negative feedback for a less than perfect seller. Complaining about habitually slow shipping, even with positive feedback, got me banned from Baron Corpus' sales. The seller has the upper hand, buyer no recourse. ebay and their subsidiary PayPal gave the buyer no recourse either. A seller can string out a sale past the time of complaint and refund. Ebay is not your friend. They collect a fee and you are basically on your own. The seller has more control by virtue of no shipping until payment is made and banning buyers they don't like. seller want to be paid promptly then are able, if they wish, to stiff buyers or serve them at their leisure. Previously they could then force the buyer into positive feedback
when it was not deserved. the feedback was then positive for the seller who was unscrupulous. Fortunately I have only had a couple of minor hiccups in buying several hundred items. Most people are decent and reasonable. I have at times used the policy of informing sellers no feedback will be left until feedback for me as a buyer is left. I personally think sellers should be able to leave negative feedback if it is deserved. In "real" transactions the buyer's responsibility is discharged when payment is made. At that time feedback is deserved for the buyer. The seller's duty is not discharged until the item in condition described is received. On Ebay the seller has been able to force positive feedback. Sellers still have the last say in refusing to sell to bad parties. No one system fits all. I say learn to live with your own conscience, knowing you have done the right thing. Happy Trails, John Strizek
Sacramento CA, USA