Author

Topic: Proposal for changing the feedback system (in general) (Read 1162 times)

Vod
legendary
Activity: 3668
Merit: 3010
Licking my boob since 1970
I disagree with anything that destroys historical data.  Makes it easier for scammers to hide their tracks.
legendary
Activity: 1582
Merit: 1064
I beg to disagree. If any of the above proposals are implemented, the time-stamping of feedback, comment or BTC amount would go away.


That is correct. Even if changes to past feedback are to be allowed, the number of times they can be changed must be fixed and the change log of the feedback must be available to the public.
legendary
Activity: 1662
Merit: 1050
I beg to disagree. If any of the above proposals are implemented, the time-stamping of feedback, comment or BTC amount would go away.
staff
Activity: 3500
Merit: 6152
I'm with you in this suggestions 100% as It could be useful , that could make the trust page look cleaner then it is right now. I'm not entirely sure how "easy" It would be to switch from current system to the new system though. (I mean for those who left more then one feedback in other users profiles already)
legendary
Activity: 2968
Merit: 3406
Crypto Swap Exchange
Wanted to propose few changes regarding extra abilities for feedback system:

1. Ability to change previous feedback from positive to neutral and negative (whenever needed upon current situation)
   - Reason for this is to let the date stays the same instead of deleting previous feedback and adding a new one that changes the real date.

2. Ability to edit previous feedback
   - Instead of giving feedback to someone each time that they do something or whenever we have trades with them, it could come handy to just update our previous comments.

3. Ability to change risked BTC amount
   - Related to #2
   - As we trade with same users, risked BTC amounts also increases so it would help making everything much more organized.


The whole point for this proposal is to make everything to be into one feedback...


Note: I checked all pages on this section and couldn't find any of the following proposals (hope I didn't missed).

Jump to: