Other people's parcels are evidence, but not of what you think
Threads and videos are the only public record of how any of this goes in practice. They are also a sample of people who had something to report, which is a specific kind of unreliable.
Type what you are after in English. What comes back is product cards, each pointing at one listing.
The sample
Who posts, and what that leaves out
People post when something was remarkable: a parcel that went perfectly, or one that went badly enough to be worth typing about. The ordinary case, where five items arrived and two were slightly off and it was all a bit of a faff, is the most common outcome and almost never gets written up.
The skew runs in two directions at once. Photographs get posted when the goods look good, so a category's thread looks better than the category is. Complaints get posted when something felt unfair, which over-represents disputes and under-represents the boring failure, which here is a card that had quietly gone stale before anyone pasted it.
Read for dates first. A post that says how long the whole thing took is worth ten that say the quality was fine.
Where people post
What each place is good at, and bad at
The division is consistent: the places that show goods best are the worst at showing process, and process is where the money goes.
| Where | Good for | Weak at |
|---|---|---|
| Long forum threads | Timelines. Dates, statuses and what support replied, often quoted | Judging goods from compressed photographs |
| Video hauls | Seeing an item move and drape, which no still photograph shows | Anything about process: the waiting is edited out |
| Short-form video | Finding out a category exists at all | Everything else. The format has no room for a timeline |
| The operator's own channels | Announcements, and what the current policy is | Disputes, which are not posted where the operator curates |
Other agents
What varies between other shopping agents, with no names
Comparisons between agents circulate constantly and most of them rank things that cannot be ranked. Speed, service quality and whether a service has ever failed its users are not published anywhere, so a ranking of those is somebody's impression with a number on it.
What does vary, and is checkable from published terms: whether the service buys for you or only forwards goods you bought yourself; whose guarantee stands behind a return, the service's or the seller's; whether inspection and storage are included or billed; and how the fee structure is composed, which is the one most comparisons get wrong by quoting a single percentage.
Those four are worth reading for yourself on any service you are considering. This site does not rank agents and does not publish a score, because the evidence to support one does not exist.
Questions
About other people's accounts
Are the good reviews fake?
Mostly no, and that is not the problem. The problem is that satisfied buyers of photogenic goods post more than anyone else, so a true sample of real reports still adds up to a misleading picture.
Should I trust a comparison of several agents?
Read what it measures. Supported platforms and fee structure are published facts anyone can check. Speed and reliability are not published anywhere, so a ranking of those is an impression dressed as data.
Where should I post a problem?
To the operator first, through the contact page, because that is the only route that can act. A thread may get attention but it cannot file anything, and the clock on an after-sales request keeps running while it collects replies.
What about GL and RL?
Community shorthand for green light and red light, a thread's verdict on a set of inspection photographs. No official process attaches to either. Help has the rest of the vocabulary, and the operator page has what can be checked about the company itself.