suggestion about reversing negative feedback

[edelC]

I am a little swap burned out at the moment..so forgive me if this comes across as a little tetchy..its not meant to be

But I think the nicest, kindest and best way to reverse negative feedback is to resend to the original partner that was flaked on. Presumably the original partner will have received an angel package,  but their faith in human nature and the swap process will have been damaged because of the original flaking and I think that they most of all should be the recipient of the 'new' package..

---->plus someone, out of the goodness of their heart angelled..It would be cool if they got a little something too, from someone who is reversing a negative..(unless they have got FOC or reversed a negative themselves.  from the process of angelling)<-----

so my suggestion is for a sticky on the angel board, to remind people that if they are looking to reverse a neg, that they should first and foremost consider resending the original...I have seen a lot of people complain that opportunities for angelling are quickly snapped up, so if they were reminded (In very big letters!) that they can play nice and soothe the original ruffled feathers of the flakee..That would be good..

I would also love to see a list of flakers from personal swaps..but I know that they are not supported by craftster, so it is probably not possible.

[Smmarrt]

I agree, Edel. I was flaked on in a swap over a year ago. The flaker did contact me (and the other partners in the group) and offered to return our original pieces, and even embellish/decorate them, as the original swap called for. Then nothing.

I checked the flaker's profile and she has cleaned up her negative by angeling for another swap, and I am still without my missing things. I have even PM'ed her myself to ask her to please return the bits I sent.

I know that the negative still exists (if you read all the feedback) but I'd love my stuff back. 18 months and counting. So it would go a long way to restoring my Craftster happiness. It's a small thing but meaningful, to me.

[edelC]

The problem with being flaked on is that it really does affect your view of swapping and i really think that while angels are wonderful...at least the ones that are doing it with no return...the original swapper needs a bit of TLC over and above the norm, just to be able to feel that it has all be resolved well.

[edelC]

is there a limit to how many times someone can reverse negative feedback? Personally I think someone should get one reverse..then be treated as a regular swapper...but if it happens again... the recompense should be  at least doubled..ie two angel packages, the original flakee, a new angel and a small to the organiser for all the hassle...

and three strikes and you are out

Yes I am draconian..but maybe this is already done?

[LimeRiot]

is there a limit to how many times someone can reverse negative feedback? Personally I think someone should get one reverse..then be treated as a regular swapper...but if it happens again... the recompense should be  at least doubled..ie two angel packages, the original flakee, a new angel and a small to the organiser for all the hassle...

and three strikes and you are out

Yes I am draconian..but maybe this is already done?

These are interesting ideas, edelC. I've also been wondering if there is a limit to how many reversals someone can have. It does seem that repeat offenders should be prevented from swapping. I'd also be curious if something could be done for repeat late senders or poor communicators as well. That would probably logistically be tough to manage but I do think that some kind of pentalities should be applied to those folks as well. Sometimes it's actually easier to deal with a flaker than it is to deal with someone who sends late and is nearly impossible to reach .

I also wanted to add that I organized a recent swap and had one of my participants experience a family tragedy during the course of the swap and was unable to send. I am aware that sometimes people "flake" for reasons that are beyond their control. That might be one of the reasons that there isn't a permanent no-swap ban??

[edelC]

limeriot...it think that you are right in that there have to be allowances for exceptional circumstance, like bereavement etc. which is where I think there should be more than one chance, but I have seen people with three reversals on their profile..I think that is a bit too much personally..

.and yes I can see how in some ways its much easier to deal with an outright flaker.

[LimeRiot]

I think there should be more than one chance, but I have seen people with three reversals on their profile..I think that is a bit too much personally..

.and yes I can see how in some ways its much easier to deal with an outright flaker.

I totally agree - three reversals is too many. I know we can technically refuse swappers but I think it would be difficult if it wasn't an official Craftster rule. I find it difficult to partner these people because I want everyone to have a good experience and I always fear that someone with a poor swap history will let down their partner.

[edelC]

yup and it makes the job of organising a lot more stressful...because you will be worried that they will flake again. I have known (gold medal deserving organisers) who always took the potential flaker for themselves as they didn't want someone else to be flaked on. And that's not right either. Personally i think it will be personal swaps mostly for me from now on..not that I haven't been flaked on in personal swaps a time or three..but mostly they are great.

[rackycoo]

While we don't have a hard and fast policy on "return flakers", I'm almost positive we have never had a case where someone flaked, came back and redeemed their feedback, flaked again, and then tried once more to return. We would definitely look into making some sort of judgment on a situation like that, and most probably, we would not allow that swapper to swap again.

Sometimes someone may have up to five swaps in their profile where they have redeemed negative feedback, but what you see there is someone who was unable to complete several swaps at once, not someone who keeps coming back, fixing things up and then flaking again.   

[rlynn]

While we don't have a hard and fast policy on "return flakers", I'm almost positive we have never had a case where someone flaked, came back and redeemed their feedback, flaked again, and then tried once more to return. We would definitely look into making some sort of judgment on a situation like that, and most probably, we would not allow that swapper to swap again.

Sometimes someone may have up to five swaps in their profile where they have redeemed negative feedback, but what you see there is someone who was unable to complete several swaps at once, not someone who keeps coming back, fixing things up and then flaking again.   

You have had this.  I know because I thought there was a rule about it and was surprised to see someone angeling to redeem feedback for the 2nd time.  The flaking incidents were a year apart so it clearly was a second separate flake situation and not a multiple flake situation.

That said, I dont know if I feel one way or another about it.  I am thankful I was able to clean up my negative feedback but it also happened in 2004, I cleaned it up in 2008 and have a number of successful swaps since then.  If something were to happen like a family emergency that caused me to fail at my craft obligations I would hate to be banned because of that previous negative.  The 2004 incident was a while ago and I did actually send, my partner also disappeared, my DC # apparently was faulty,  and I switched emails so I was no longer getting notification of crafster PMs, which means it could never be determined whether I sent.   I was actually shocked and embarrassed to come back in 2008 to find I had a negative.

I think it probably does have to be on an individual basis.  Im not sure if there is a better way to deal with it.  Plus don't organizers have the right to turn people down for being repeatedly late or having flaked in the past???