PROBATION DISCUSSIONS 21 21

[ckp1680]

First of all, didn't chunkybutt (shudder) pay the 50 bucks? That should get him off the list, right? And second, do you see a problem with adding a 48 hour grace period for the issue to be discussed? Everyone always agrees that it's best when these things are worked out, right?

 

I am glad to read this but I am confused because we already HAVE agreed on both a PM and a "reasonable" waiting period for reply to a PM. This is very old news but some folks are acting like it is all a new concept.

 

From the original accusation, the deal went off in February and it was presented to all that multiple attempts were made for contact, therefore the reasonable waiting period had expired long ago. I agree, this is not a new concept.

 

And to recall the original post...

 

Could we add Chunkybutt to the list. I have been holding a stack of books for him since february. I have made contact with him recently, sent a total and he has not responded. I am tired of chasing the guy for the money. I will notify him of this post and allow him to chime in as per the rules. The guy is really nice, I do like him. But leaving me with little to no responses for so long brings me to this.

 

If he completes the sale, I will return and ask him to be removed.

 

I don't believe this last part has been resolved, yet, therefore no removal.

 

well I did complete the transaction, however Resurrection said in his PM to me that he would like to remove me from probation list if I stop slinging Mud. So I guess it is a case of, "You better be quiet and stop proving me wrong or I will make your life miserable" type of situation.

 

secondly I only fell under the criteria of the list (at the time you put me on it) because you believed him and did not hear my side.

 

granted I did owe him money for something I forgot I did.

But maybe I should have put him on the list for not totalling me up in a timely manner like I asked him to

 

just sayin

 

All this could have been avoided by you just saying "I'm sorry, I'm new and I forgot" I don't know Pat but from what I'm reading he would just like to move on.

You should just take your books and be happy to be removed from the probation list. It's really not that big of a deal unless you make it out to be one

[skypinkblu]

tried to stay away from the discussion earlier...we definitely did not need another cook in the kitchen so to speak. I have a couple of thoughts on the direction the discussion is headed, now that things have cooled down a bit.

 

First, I think there should be some sort of mechanism to determine if the majority of buyers and sellers are in favor of the proposed rule modifications before we ask for them to be implemented and stickied...perhaps a vote over the course of a week with simple majority deciding on ratifying the proposal or tabling it for further discussion.

 

Secondly, I have some concerns about the proposed rule set...in order to avoid what I would see as some potential serious complications, it probably needs to be made clear that these new rules only apply to transactions first implemented after they are accepted.

 

Finally, I have a pretty significant problem with this proposal...

4) Removal From The PL

a) If the accuser requests the accused be removed form the PL, they will be removed.

b) If the accused makes full restitution, they will be removed from the PL. This is not subject to the wishes of the accuser

 

For sake of argument here is where I see it breaking down. Joe Bob on my X-Men 94. He fails to pay...following the above rules I have him placed on the probation list after multiple attempts to contact, discussion in the PL thread etc., etc.

 

Example 1: I need the cash for the book, so I then sell it to someone else or auction it off. Restitution in my mind, at that point, may not be possible. What if I sell the book for more, he simply apologizes and gets removed since I have cash in pocket?

I don't get this one. You sold the comic to someone else, why would that be considered restitution from Joe Bob? It'd still be up to the two of you to work out your own definition of restitution.

 

Example 1b: I again sell the book. This time it goes for $95 when I agreed to $100 with Joe Bob. He simply sends me $5 and gets off the list? :shrug: Again, this would be an unacceptable resolution in my mind. I would not feel that this is sufficient for a lesson to be learned and would wish for future boardies to continue to be warned of this individual.

I don't get this one either. Again, you sold the comic to someone else, that has nothing to do with a resolution between you and Joe Bob, right? As before, it'd still be up to the two of you to work out your own definition of restitution.

 

Example 2: I retain the book, but have no further desire to sell it to or communicate with this individual. Some transactions get quite ugly, and after Joe Bob defaults, I should not be forced back into a transaction with what I consider a high risk for further shenanigans

Yep, I can see that happening (see below)....

 

Example 3: Who gets to decide what restitution is. What if I purchased another book intending to use the proceeds from the PL sale to pay for the item? Now I no longer have the money I anticipated. If I back out, how can I be recompensed for the damaged relationship. Or what if I use my credit card, can I then include the interest I accrue? What about my time, effort, and emotional investment in dealing with the PL situation? Do I get to decide on appropriate recompense for that

You and Joe Bob have to agree on what "restitution" is, with the emphasis on you.

 

I guess to be blunt, I am not a fan of others deciding for me when a personal transaction is resolved or not. There is opportunity for them to voice concern prior to inclusion of the offending party on the PL. I do, however, see the concern of the complaining party no longer being an active boardie and someone on the PL wanting another shot. In a limited circumstance like that I would be in favor of the rule above. However, I strongly believe that it should remain solely the right of the person placing the offending party on the list to remove said person (again if they remain an active boardie).

So, about restitution. I'd say that usually, it'll come down to paying for the comics one agrees to buy, or shipping the comics one agrees to sell. In the cases where that's not possible, it gets a little tough. If other comics, or another form of payment is possible, that sounds great to me. If the offending buyer can find another buyer for the seller, that sounds pretty good too.

 

But in those cases where restitution just can't be made, there's gotta be some way to get off the list. If I slack off for whatever reason, and fail to pay someone for some comics, then I find myself on the list. Maybe the seller is really freakin' pizzed, and has no intention of letting me off the hook. Or just doesn't want to deal with me any more. I shouldn't be stuck on the list forever, right? I mean, I've been here for years, I've paid everyone within minutes except for this one time (at band camp), I should get another chance, no? So how about a probationary period, length to be determined (three months?). If I'm a good little boy or girl for that time, I get a pass, even if the bitter seller still hates my guts. In those cases where a pass seems inappropriate, I'd suggest that we might be talking about an HOS candidate.

 

I see Heath's point. A few years ago, I had this happen to me, someone wanted a book, I agreed to hold it. He continued to tell me he still wanted the book, etc, etc...since we had a deal, I held it for an extraordinary amount of time.

I didn't want to be the one on the probation list, and it was an awkward situation, since he kept saying he wanted it. I'm also a very patient type of person...but after a while, I was getting annoyed.

 

After maybe a year...I don't remember the time period, I sold the book, for less than our deal was supposed to be. The guy came back on here, said he apologized to me...but the book was gone, so there was nothing he could do (his statement).

 

His friends (I'm not calling anyone old boys, but he had supporters) all jumped in, said how great he was and he was now off the list. I was not exactly thrilled with the way this went down, but there was nothing I could do.

 

He wound up back ON the list in the Hall of Shame, which did not surprise me.

 

Being a member in good standing here, is not a right, it's a privilege.

 

If the seller loses money and the book is gone, there should be some kind of compensation to the seller...and the seller should be the one who agrees to the amount.

 

Now some of us are really nice and would ask for nothing...sometimes, there ARE special circumstances...(death, illness, alien invasions, etc) but it's the seller or buyer(if they are the offended party) who needs to agree...whether it's money, time served, or some other method.

 

Hopefully the offended party will be fair...but in any case, since they did not break the rules...they should be the one setting the tone..

 

I love the idea of having the rules set out again...I also suggest they be posted along with the probation list, at the top of the list in bold.

 

And Eric, I was rooting for you, but you need to chill a little, he's obviously trying to work stuff out with you.

 

[Speedy-D]

Sharon, sounds like we agree, but your prose is a bit more purple.

Hah, get it! PURPLE!!! Bet you never heard that one before.

[skypinkblu]

I was going to post in green for the effect;) ...but I got used to purple;)

[PovertyRow]

well I did complete the transaction, however Resurrection said in his PM to me that he would like to remove me from probation list if I stop slinging Mud. So I guess it is a case of, "You better be quiet and stop proving me wrong or I will make your life miserable" type of situation.

 

secondly I only fell under the criteria of the list (at the time you put me on it) because you believed him and did not hear my side.

 

granted I did owe him money for something I forgot I did.

But maybe I should have put him on the list for not totalling me up in a timely manner like I asked him to

 

just sayin

 

Yes, I removed you from the list because the process was not followed. Your accusing jazzman of the reason he put you on the list is wrong. He did it because he misunderstood the wating period concept and thought it was the right thing to do. There was no spite in that.

 

You know, chunky, people here can sell or not sell to whomever they please. While it is not encouraged, people can even choose to sell to those on the PL. But every time you post like this you set off alarms some people here may remember when it comes time to sell.

 

just sayin

[Speedy-D]

well I did complete the transaction, however Resurrection said in his PM to me that he would like to remove me from probation list if I stop slinging Mud. So I guess it is a case of, "You better be quiet and stop proving me wrong or I will make your life miserable" type of situation.

 

secondly I only fell under the criteria of the list (at the time you put me on it) because you believed him and did not hear my side.

 

granted I did owe him money for something I forgot I did.

But maybe I should have put him on the list for not totalling me up in a timely manner like I asked him to

 

just sayin

 

Yes, I removed you from the list because the process was not followed. Your accusing jazzman of the reason he put you on the list is wrong. He did it because he misunderstood the wating period concept and thought it was the right thing to do. There was no spite in that.

 

You know, chunky, people here can sell or not sell to whomever they please. While it is not encouraged, people can even choose to sell to those on the PL. But every time you post like this you set off alarms some people here may remember when it comes time to sell.

 

just sayin

Man, don't bait the guy! It really does sound like he just missed the boat.

 

And chunkybutt (why do I do this to myself???), I think it's time to let it go. The marketplace here is pretty great, I'd hate to see you give yourself a bad rep just cuz you're upset.

[Forbush-Man]

But maybe I should have put him on the list for not totalling me up in a timely manner like I asked him to

 

just sayin

 

So, you think you have a right to put someone on a probation list just because they don't invoice you in a timely fashion?!?

 

Do the math & pay up. If you're uncertain about the total, PM the seller. What a crock of B.S.

[PovertyRow]

But maybe I should have put him on the list for not totalling me up in a timely manner like I asked him to

 

just sayin

 

So, you think you have a right to put someone on a probation list just because they don't invoice you in a timely fashion?!?

 

Do the math & pay up. If you're uncertain about the total, PM the seller. What a crock of B.S.

 

Fuelie, he already paid up. So typical - a day late and an idea short!

[Snake Eyes]

Sharon, sounds like we agree, but your prose is a bit more purple.

Hah, get it! PURPLE!!! Bet you never heard that one before.

 

Yep, Sharon more eloquently discussed what I was trying ham-fistedly to get at with the examples above. The rule, as written stated...

 

4) Removal From The PL

a) If the accuser requests the accused be removed form the PL, they will be removed.

b) If the accused makes full restitution, they will be removed from the PL. This is not subject to the wishes of the accuser

 

Full restitution can be read to be simply being made whole at the buying price. I would like to see the buyer determine what restitution is (which may exceed the original purchase price of the comic or not even be monetary in nature). Ultimately the thought that removal is not subject to the wishes of the accuser really rubs me the wrong way and strikes me as dangerous. It looks like we are on the same page to Speedy with you indicating restitution should be worked out between the two parties (my reading of the rule did not elaborate upon this being the definition of restitution). I just see a number of potential situations where restitution may not be possible or desireable by both parties depending on the nature of the offense :shrug: And perhaps you are right about the one free pass after your first violation and serving a sentence of the PL of sorts. Maybe you get that get out of jail card after being a boardie in good standing for one year?

 

And thank you for the hard work Pov...very good start to codifying the various rules surrounding this process...back in the day I used to be a political science major...was always fascinated by the consensus building process and the crafting of policy/law (I know could I be any more geeky???) :doh:

Edited July 3, 2011 by Snake Eyes

[mikenyc]

No, you shouldn't expect a seller to ship to Clink it's tacky and you are........oh wait.......that was a different silly arguement.

 

There are so many going on it's hard to keep track.

[PovertyRow]

Thanks Snake - 4b rubs me the worng way too. I added it knowing it would be singled out, hoping others would express themsleves on it. Most of the rules are pretty straightforward and reflect much of what is already in place. But this one is a sticky one.

 

As far as a deal impossible to fulfill or that incurredd extra expenses, something like:

 

4b) If extra expenses are incurred in the completion of the transaction, or the transaction can no longer be completed, the accuser may present acceptable alternatives to be discussed on the boards. A resolution completed in this manner to the accuser's satisfaction will result in the accused being removed form the PL.

 

As far as liking or not liking automatic removal if the original deal is fulfilled, regardless of the wishes of the accused:

 

That actually speaks to the spirit of the whole Probation List process. You know how heated some of these discussions can get. Is the PL designed to let people act out of spite, or to insure smoother transactions? I think the latter.

 

Perhaps something like:

 

4c) If the original transaction is completed within 7 days of the accused being put on the PL, they will be removed from the PL.

 

I think 7 days is reasonable, especially if the accuser does not delay for a long time before bringing the situation up on the Discussion board.

 

Thoughts on this? Anyone?

[supapimp]

this isn't too hard to figure out, if you post in a sellers thread, payment is expected within 3-4 days, if not, all bets are off after seven days. that's what i'd do.

[Speedy-D]

No, you shouldn't expect a seller to ship to Clink it's tacky and you are........oh wait.......that was a different silly arguement.

 

There are so many going on it's hard to keep track.

I actually did at this

[PovertyRow]

No, you shouldn't expect a seller to ship to Clink it's tacky and you are........oh wait.......that was a different silly arguement.

 

There are so many going on it's hard to keep track.

I actually did at this

 

I could not resist a post or two in it.

[thehumantorch]

First of all, didn't chunkybutt (shudder) pay the 50 bucks? That should get him off the list, right? And second, do you see a problem with adding a 48 hour grace period for the issue to be discussed? Everyone always agrees that it's best when these things are worked out, right?

 

I am glad to read this but I am confused because we already HAVE agreed on both a PM and a "reasonable" waiting period for reply to a PM. This is very old news but some folks are acting like it is all a new concept.

 

From the original accusation, the deal went off in February and it was presented to all that multiple attempts were made for contact, therefore the reasonable waiting period had expired long ago. I agree, this is not a new concept.

 

And to recall the original post...

 

Could we add Chunkybutt to the list. I have been holding a stack of books for him since february. I have made contact with him recently, sent a total and he has not responded. I am tired of chasing the guy for the money. I will notify him of this post and allow him to chime in as per the rules. The guy is really nice, I do like him. But leaving me with little to no responses for so long brings me to this.

 

If he completes the sale, I will return and ask him to be removed.

 

I don't believe this last part has been resolved, yet, therefore no removal.

 

well I did complete the transaction, however Resurrection said in his PM to me that he would like to remove me from probation list if I stop slinging Mud. So I guess it is a case of, "You better be quiet and stop proving me wrong or I will make your life miserable" type of situation.

 

secondly I only fell under the criteria of the list (at the time you put me on it) because you believed him and did not hear my side.

 

granted I did owe him money for something I forgot I did.

But maybe I should have put him on the list for not totalling me up in a timely manner like I asked him to

 

just sayin

 

Shame on you.

[PovertyRow]

this isn't too hard to figure out, if you post in a sellers thread, payment is expected within 3-4 days, if not, all bets are off after seven days. that's what i'd do.

 

Supa, you frighten and confuse me and make baby tadpoles weep.

[RockMyAmadeus]

Nick, reading the response from Chunkybutt, should hopefully, prove that YES!! EVERYONE should be given the right to respond.

 

You are not dealing in life or death situations here, there is absolutely no reason not to give people time to respond. I think 24 to 48 hours is the minimum, I'd like 72, after all, people do go away for weekends.

 

If there was a person with a gun pointed at you, I could understand the rush to take action...these issues are not life threatening, they ARE issues,and of course people get emotional...why on earth make instant decisions?

 

BTW, I think Pat also has the right to read Chunkybutt's response and answer.

 

Sharon, I appreciate your point. And this situation with Chunkybutt definitely shows confusion between the parties involved.

 

My concern is there are different situations that come up, and not all may make sense to handle them the same. Especially if there is repeat history involved, or many parties impacted. But like I said, not looking to fight over the topic. Was just interested in the stance taken.

 

Everybody...every single person...should have the right to face their accuser and respond, in any and every situation. There is not a conceivable situation in the universe that exists whereby the accused should not have the ability to present his/her side of the story.

 

That is a foundation of Western jurisprudence, which itself is founded on British and English Common Law going back 1,000 years.

 

Everybody, in every case, whether it's their first or 10,000th, has the right to present their side of the story. There shouldn't even be a question on this point.

[RockMyAmadeus]

someone should always have their day in court. when appropriate.

 

Decidedly fixed.

[Speedy-D]

someone should always have their day in court. when appropriate.

 

Decidedly fixed.

WTTB!

[Bosco685]

someone should always have their day in court. when appropriate.

 

Decidedly fixed.

 

What's your issue?