Topic: Sell and Buy Services Here (Read 288 times)

I am big fan of Fiverr since it started its successful ascent in the world of freelancing and I am still a member of the site up to now though I am not active anymore. Fiverr is a great trailblazer a great pioneer specially in the aspect of reaching more people and lowering the price category. However, Fiverr is not the be-all of cheap freelancing as you are pointing out as there are still many kinds of services that Fiverr is not into...and this is where other players can come in. I love your idea of expanding the coverage area and make the fees aligned with the industry. I am wishing you all the luck and always make your project viable so it can last.

This kind of idea is bigger than an individual in my own perspective. You need collaboration and partnership to get noticed in this space as there are many giants that are doing well in the type of solution you are offering. If you want to tackle their deficiencies,  userbase matters. Do a well thorough reseach

However, if you sell all sorts of nonsense, then you will be quickly banned ...

In any case, I have the tools to screen out all kinds of psychopaths. I think this will increase the competitive advantage of your platform.

I think the same could be said about opaque resolution systems as well. I've seen nonstop talk about how PayPal has ruled incorrectly and all they're given is a generic mail response. A centralised system like PayPal is subject to social engineering and there are plenty of guides on it.

For those reasons, I feel a voting system is best. Most people are going to choose the correct answer when it is warranted. Bad dudes are going to be malicious regardless of if there's a public or private system. I want to make things better for the well-intentioned user.

While no system is perfect, I feel like we can always improve. The public voting system is no holy grail by no means, but I do consider it an improvement over what exists now.

Thanks for the good comment!


The person who does the work is responsible for their own quality of work. It would be no different if you rang up a company or if they offered services on Taskly. We don't take any responsibility for the final products. It's up to the user to do their own due diligence and ensure that they are confident in who are they are getting services from. Similar to how eBay isn't responsible for what sellers send to people.


I agree. I feel like there's a few good ideas in the cryptosphere but it's quite complex for the average person to get a grasp on. Pushing forward for public acceptance is the best thing we can do currently.

Here is another point: employee certification. This is the most important part when choosing a service. How responsible is the person I let into my house to fix the plumbing?

I can offer valid psychological tests and a person’s testing procedure to cut off abnormal behavior and apparent abnormalities.

Any vote based system is not a correct system for dispute resolution.Public opinion can be very biased and sometimes easily swings with some events.
You need fact based evaluation system but I guess  by mediating in deals you will easily become party to the law suits. 

You'd have to combine many services into a decentralised platform like this.

Decentralised reputation score, decentralised insurance contracts, decentralised community moderation...

Every aspect of the centralised version you'll have to take into account one way or another.  There are big projects working on each of these main aspects, but they are far from consumer friendly at this early stage.

He wouldn't last long. He would have to risk so much that it wouldn't be economical. No system is perfect. PayPal lets plenty of scammers go. I want to try reduce that number to a point that it's unsubstantial.

So all Quickseller has to do is scam for more than he will spend on voting?

Won't work - scammers will find flaws in any automated system.

They will have to put some stake behind their votes. They couldn't just vote. They would be required to put some money behind each vote. If they lose they will lose the amount of currency they put in. But that's just one side of the equation.

There will be a feedback system as well. So there will be some preventative measures taken by the user to make sure that they do a good job in practice.

Hi ! I'm just a new member
I like your ideas but in fact to operate this system we have to rent people, develop website,,, so on
the ideal should be lowest fee market as posible, with full support custumer service

So a person like Quickseller who would make multiple voting accounts could scam freely?  How would you "vet the voters" without manual investigation?

Most of the time you wouldn't need an independent figure. Most transactions will go smoothly. What you need to watch out for is the 1% which go awry. This could be because they're looking to exit scam, they're new accounts, or just generally being unpleasant.

If there is an issue, all it takes is one side to open up a dispute. It will then be up to both sides to present their case as best they can. This will be publicly laid out for people to vote on. Voting won't be free or up to abuse. There will be a certain stake involved. If side A wins over side B, side A get the funds of side B. This will disincentivise risky votes (devil advocates or those taking their chances), botting, and just silly gamblers. It will be up to the people to publicly decide who is right.

I devised this system as an alternative to a PayPal dispute system. If you have any experience selling or buying online, they can be a real pain. They're opaque, vague, centralised. They don't let you in the know or to even fairly present your case. There is plenty of exploitation and even social engineering by illegitimate users to abuse this system. With my plan I hope to reduce that abuse substantially if not totally.

There would be a dispute system. If an issue arises, the two must make their cases. It will then be up to the public to vote based on the stories told. This is better than an opaque system like PayPal which would centrally decide on who they think is right. It will be fairer, more accurate, less centralised.

Or the home owner refusing to pay because the lawn wasn't cut "correctly".

Such a "service of services" would have too much manual input to work... Not to mention lawsuits....

Basically you want to create a smart contract of services. Release money when work is done.
I see problem in this model that who will independently verify that lawn is mowed properly and payment should be released?
How can system stop service taker abusing the system?

The platform will just be a mediator in a sense. It's each person's job to make sure they're qualified to actually offer services within specific categories.

Will you offer insurance like Uber does?  How will you vet the babysitters?  You don't offer security - just accountability. 

I was just using the mowing thing as an example. You would be able to use the website to see any tenders for services you could offer. It could range from dog walking, auto repair, carpeting, child care, basically any service you can think of. The website isn't designed to cater towards any specific jobs like Uber, Lyft Fiverr or Freelancer. It's meant to be a universal platform where anyone could offer services safely and with a form of security. You could also request services if it's not available.


I'm not all that fond of ICOs. Far too dodgy and if I were to be legitimate I don't have the purchasing power to pursue doing one.

It will take a lot to reach a bunch of people. In my mind I had a dream of pressing a button and all the attention in the world flooding in. But it's not that easy unfortunately! I've never done promotion. Since it's a unique niche it will take a while to get its own bearing as well. At the same time I need to be prudent with my finances.

Any project that lists it's only difference as "cryptocurrency" will not succeed.  :/