I need your honest opinion

[Taj]

OK guys, I'd like your opinion on this.
I currently have a rule in my cycle town, saying that you must have a 100% wifi rating.
I feel like maybe changing this rule, because maybe second chances are necessary
But I've been scammed waaay too many times on here, a total of 9. I've only been on here for about 2 months!

So I need your opinion. Do you think the rule is fine? Or should I abolish it?

Oh yeah, and if you say I should abolish the rule, and you DON'T have a 100% wifi rating, I'm gonna silently laugh You earned that negative rating!

 

[mitzi_crossing]

Hmm I feel this is a tough one. I've never been scammed from anyone on here (keep in mind I didnt use this website for more than a year after joining.) But I have been scammed in the past on other forums and don't trust many people with this game anymore. If I were you, after it happening 9 times, I would keep the rule.

But this opinion could just be shaped around the fact that I'm mean and don't believe in second chances heh

 

[Arcticfox5]

I personally hardly come across people who don't have a 100% positive rating, so I wouldn't really be bothered.

On the other hand, I don't have a cycling town. Also, it should be completely up to you, since you are the host so you should be able to set any rules as you see fit.

If you do decide to take away the rule, I suggest you set up this other one that I've seen people use quite a lot that seems pretty reasonable: you, as the host, can cancel any "trade" for whatever reason. This way, if someone does argue with you, you wouldn't necessarily have to justify yourself.

 

[ams]

If it was me I'd probably check out their rating page to see what the negative rating was for. If it was something like stealing or being really disrespectful I'd probably choose not to trade with them, but if it was something minor I'd give them a second chance.

 

[TheGreatBrain]

It's up to you. It kind of makes me wonder why people have negative ratings in the first place. I've never had any problems with people on here, and it seems like you would have to be really rude for someone to give a bad rating. So a part of me says that you should stick with your rule, but I also agree that people deserve a second chance.

 

[jiny]

Well, I'm sure you know what happened neester. xP I've been scammed once and I gave the girl a negative feedback.

I agree, I hardly see anyone with a not 100% rating.

 

[Stacie]

I'd say the rule is fair buuuut

if you're having doubts maybe say if the persons negative feedback is older than x amount of months with positive feedback since then it's fine? Also for people that are new to the site with no feedback say their account must be older than x amount of time or something?

Maybe I'm too soft though, idk c:

 

[Kess]

hmm... maybe you should do it at some kind of ratio? Factor in how long they've been here, how active they are, how many people have given them ratings, and then what their percentage is. I think that would prob be the fairest way? Does that make sense?

- - - Post Merge - - -

yeah like if someone commented "wifi kept going out" or "kept going AFK while playing" then I think you should consider them a change. Maybe they were busy, maybe it was raining. You know?

 

[lizzy541]

you should change the rule to, 'must have 100% wi-fi rating but will consider depending on the reason' ex. i know someone who got a bad rating because they won an auction and another bidder was angry. however, i rarely see negative wi-fi ratings, nor have i ever given one. has anyone tried to get a villager from your cycling town but you said no? or is this just something you were wondering?

 

[Dinosaurz]

Dude, review them for yourself, make a personal opinion.
Say 'I can choice by wifi ratings if I would like to trade with you'. Then choice. By negative feedback/messages.

 

[Ichigo.]

Hmm...how would you get scammed doing villager trades, exactly? (Honest question, because I can't think of anything). I mean, as long as they pay you first before picking up the villager, that's fine right? And making sure to follow them to insure that they don't take anything would be good insurance, but I'm sure you already do that anyway. I think 100% isn't necessary as long as they haven't had multiple negative ratings, and also have lots of positive ones.

 

[Serif]

Gonna agree with most everyone and say to judge case by case. People get negative ratings for various reasons and if it's something serious, don't trade with them. If it's minor, give them the benefit of the doubt. If it's really old with lots of positive since, consider that person has probably matured some and learned from their mistake.

It's also harder to be scammed in a cycling town. You can easily flick the switch or power down if someone doesn't listen to the rules set for your town. Also make sure you get your TBT before allowing them to take the villager.

 

[okaimii]

Seeing how you're iffy about it, I wouldn't do it. People have negative ratings for a reason. I don't see the point.

there are exceptions though

 

[Akimari]

At first I was thinking that it'd be best to keep your rule, considering how I rarely see people with a wifi-rating under 100%, but since there are going to be occasions where idiots give out unfair ratings that for some reason couldn't be taken away, then I'd go with everyone else and adjust your rule so that you still require a 100% wifi-rating, but depending on the circumstances behind a negative rating, you may make an exception. So if someone has like, 1 negative wifi-rating with the reason being "lol u suck" then I'd make an exception, but if someone has 10 negative ratings that say stuff like "Took my hybrids", "Ran over my flowers", "Stole x villager", then I'd deny them.

Just play it safe my friend.

 

[applecarts]

Hmm maybe at the end of the rule put a little * and then somewhere below have something like this:

* If you do not have a 100% wi-fi rating, and would like to explain why it is not at 100%, please PM me! If I deem your explanation sufficient, then I will consider doing business with you.

 

[LadyTruoc]

It's hard to decide. I only want to work with 100% WiFi ratings but I've heard of people getting negatives ones because someone was upset because they won a giveaway or something which is not cool. If they're paying me TBT before they come then I don't see the problem because what do I have to lose, nothing. I'll flip the switch if they're being sketchy. Same if they're giving me stuff in game for a pickup, they have to give it to me before they can take the villager. But I do treat no ratings and negative wifi the same. Really just depends on the situation.

 

[mari8076]

Like others said, I would stay with 100% rule, but give people under 100% a chance to explain themselves.
For all you know they might have gotten a negative rating just because someone felt like giving them one.