I really miss this even though I don't do much trading and most are great traders I still find one now and then that makes me question whether I will ever trade again.

I have grown alot over the years and don't mind leaving not so good feedback.

Thanks

I've thought about extending the green pages to include the ability to endorse (by comment or a simple no-comment endorsement) other members.

We give thumbs up and acorns all the time to show how we feel about eat members posts/photos/ideas.
Are we know talking about endorsing the members as traders? meaning they are good at trading/keeping their promises/sending on time/packing properly/send good plants? Wouldn't that be part of the trade tracker feature?

Is leaving feedback necessarily a good can of worms to open? While I think very highly of the person I have traded with - and would most definitely give her the highest of recommendations possible (she truly is an angel) - what happens if someone gets a poor review and disagrees with it? Would that not start a war of words or, at the very least, stir up some hard feelings? Would a rebuttal be allowed?

It seems to me, if you are concerned about trading with someone, can't you just treemail them and ask if they have traded before? If they have, can't you just contact the other member(s) (references if you will) to see if all went well? I know that I would not mind vouching for the angel that I traded with before nor would I mind if she used me as a reference.

I agree with OldGardener. This could lead to trouble.

This is why I was looking into the idea of just providing a way to endorse another member - positive feedback only, just like the green pages.

So if someone wants to trade with you but they have zero endorsements in the green pages, you would take that as a sign of caution.

I think the only disagreeing we would see if someone was not a good trader. On the other site I never saw anything that started a war.

I got one bad feedback on ebay and the buyer didn't bother to contact me first. They called me names and on their's I said you can tell the kind of person by what they type as a rebuttal.

Dave did you have this problem Of ugliness "Over there"?

What about just good or becareful boxes and no place for a comment?

If there is a "be careful" check box option, it seems to me that there would still be the potential of Dave or Trish having to referee at some point.

Also, would the fact that a trade was agreed upon even be verified? In the past, I received a tree-mail requesting that I send a particular plant to someone who had just signed up despite this warning in the database:

Please don't ask the member for plants unless they specifically say the plants are available.

I chose not to respond. Would they now have the ability to leave me poor feedback (or a "be careful of") ?

Dave, if you do go ahead with a rating system, could a member choose to opt out?

On a different plant forum there is an iTrade rating system. Some people abused the system by agreeing beforehand that no matter how the trade went they would give each other positive feedback to 'up' their ratings. Other people would give a positive rating then change it to a negative if the plant failed to thrive.

(In my opinion) Too much of an opportunity for this to become another popularity contest and to divide the members rather than bring them together as one team/family.

Each trade is an agreement between two people. Each must communicate effectively with the other, send healthy plants properly packaged and mail the fastest/best way. The person receiving the trade bears the responsibility to immediately take proper care of the plant. In my opinion, people could end up with a bad rating when they had no control over the situation when the blame should be on the Post Office, the weather, etc.

My personal feeling is that plant/seed trading is at our own risk. I don't like a rating system because of the fact that responses can end up with harsh replies back and forth and could get out of hand and cause unpleasantness and arguments to escalate on the threads, which is not enjoyable for any of us. I've just always felt that a trade, good or bad is a risk I'm willing to take; I had maybe two bad experiences (out of hundreds) on the other site ... but I just chalked those losses up to lessons learned and did not trade with those particular members again.

I do like the idea of a Trade Tracker where I can make notes of the plants I've received, the person I traded with etc. A place where I can personally look back and see if it was a pleasant experience or not and decide whether I want to trade with them again.

I think the most we should do is let people endorse each other with positive reviews with no place for negative reviews.

Gosh - I really am not trying to be argumentative but I think that Greene made some excellent points:

greene said:On a different plant forum there is an iTrade rating system. Some people abused the system by agreeing beforehand that no matter how the trade went they would give each other positive feedback to 'up' their ratings...

(In my opinion) Too much of an opportunity for this to become another popularity contest and to divide the members rather than bring them together as one team/family...
:

Also, if the system is based on a "thumbs-up" type of deal only, won't it really just show who trades the most often (active traders) and not necessarily reflect the quality of the trades? For instance, the angel I traded with sent me the most divine, uber-package of plants but (and I could be wrong) I don't believe that she trades all of the time. Would she not, then, be listed lower than someone, for instance, who sends plants that are just okay but who trades more frequently?

Another thought... what about a less-than-honest trader who appears to send good plants but, after the plants bloom 2 or 3 years down the line, have substituted a less-than-desirable cultivar. I am thinking particularly about a couple of threads I read some time back in the Daylily Forum where an unscrupulous seller was sending out ditch-type lilies and/or unnamed cultivars instead of the top-named dl's that they advertised. If that were to happen here, they would appear to be a top-of-the-line trader with glowing endorsements until it was way too late...

Wow you have all scared me out of trading all together. I think I will stick to local.

Never mind feedback I just won't trade.

Oh dear, that definitely wasn't my intent. There are some really fantastic people on this site. As Lin said:

plantladylin said:... I've just always felt that a trade, good or bad is a risk I'm willing to take; I had maybe two bad experiences (out of hundreds) on the other site ... but I just chalked those losses up to lessons learned and did not trade with those particular members again.

A couple out of hundreds are really good odds!

I, myself, traded for the very first time last year and it was a wonderful experience I also made a purchase from another member and it has worked out great, too! I think that it is just like everything else in life - a little caution is warranted. Would you be comfortable just tree-mailing the person(s) you want to trade with and see if they have traded before?

greene said:
Each trade is an agreement between two people. Each must communicate effectively with the other, send healthy plants properly packaged and mail the fastest/best way. The person receiving the trade bears the responsibility to immediately take proper care of the plant. In my opinion, people could end up with a bad rating when they had no control over the situation when the blame should be on the Post Office, the weather, etc.

I agree that it could be creating the opportunity for misuse and that what Greene has said makes sense.

I for one am bad about buying/getting plants and not getting them in the ground right away. No way can I blame that on the person/nursery I got them from but some might disagree.

The green thumb is a good marker but perhaps a green star for traders might be better.

From there out. Communicate, communicate, communicate. Unless it appears some fraud is being perpetrated then bring it to the monitors attention ...

As someone who loves to trade and is a risk-taker, I think a trade tracker could be convenient in more than one way. I've traded hundreds of times this past winter and spring and have had very few disappointments. Having a trade tracker that we can make public listing trades with members would be nice. This way, others can see who has traded with whom and do their own checking if they'd like to decrease risk. We wouldn't have to make feedback public--or even what was traded public, if we don't want to.

I do appreciate the opportunity to make it up to others one on one, and don't like the risk of being blasted publicly because someone's having a bad day or a package was left out in the blistering sun for days, or for an honest oversight on my part. Honestly, I think most traders with feedback on other sites don't get negative feedback because most other traders would rather remain silent about their disappointment than stir things up. I'm that way myself.

Just to point out the other side of the issue:

Feedback provides a little bit of security to new members. For example- imagine a senario where a co-op vendor completely botched a whole co-op. "Everyone" knows about it, so "no one" would buy from that person again.
(I used quotes because not everyone on the whole site would be aware of the issue even when it feels like it).
Fast forward a few years when that vendor tries again.

Do you sit by and watch unsuspecting people get taken? Do you let newbies know? Do you want to get involved?
What level of duty do you take to keep people safe?

Dave and I are totally hands off when it comes to trades and co-ops. It is "at your own risk", period.

Feedback does give a little bit of warning and help and heads-up to the newbie.

Trust me, we're more than aware of the pros and cons of each.

I would think, though, that in the case of a poorly run co-op, if someone wasn't brave enough to say something when the vendor tries again, they probably wouldn't be brave enough to leave a negative review. I also thought Dave was proposing more of a thumbs-up type of arrangement and, in that case, would that be of any help? I am thinking that there would be no feedback left at all in the case of the wayward vendor. The way it is now, I feel that there are a lot of good folks here that actually would step up and ask directly if the vendor had resolved his/her issue(s) when they re-listed (or at least post a comment along the lines of "aren't you the guy/gal who had so much trouble with a co-op before? You poor thing, you must be brave to be trying it again" or something along those lines that would act as a "gentle" red flag).

I know that before I would be willing to join a co-op with someone new to me, I would click on that person's name and peruse their past postings to see how their past co-cops went. But perhaps I am unusually cautious ?