Platform's Responsibilities in Buyer Feedback

According to the academic George Boak, Action Learning involves a Learning Cycle in which feedback and reflection are used to drive actions and set objectives for another cycle.

Can freelance sellers up their game if the Platform starves them of the very feedback they need?

For example, to the extent that sellers are in an auction with buyers, consider that eBay as a well-known auction site, provides bidders with feedback on their bid when they are a losing bidder. In that way bidders receive feedback and can judge in future the extent to which they need to stretch their maximum bid.

By contrast, we unsuccessful bidders (sellers) on PPH receive no feedback so are unable to learn from that feedback the extent to which we need to discount the charge for our services to be successfully awarded a project in a market in which the service is commoditised, undifferentiated by service or quality and in which buyers might be suspected to be buying on price (alone).

None of this is fed-back to selling freelancers in a way in which we can use that feedback to refine our strategy to be more successful in meeting the needs of service purchasers. For example, it appears that there isn't a standard set of buttons that buyers are required to press that give coded high-level reasons for them choosing the selected seller e.g. Price, Speed of submitting a proposal, Quality of the proposal, Cert Rating of the seller etc.

We want to strive to be better service providers.  We want to use feedback in an action learning cycle.  Unfortunately the PPH platform isn't much help here.  This seems to be a serious and major omission or limitation of the platform that I trust will be addressed quickly.

Thank you for reading.