PROBATION DISCUSSIONS 21 21

[N/A]

 

 

While I agree this isn't a HOS issue, it's certainly a PL issue, and until we fully understand how many people are impacted, we aren't grasping the solution because we're not identifying the problem.

 

Or more simply, Menace dug this hole for himself, a lot of people are impacted and he doesn't need anyone diminishing the perceived reach of his own actions by splitting the hairs between "ramifications" and "issues".

 

There are many solid, responsible, earnest facilitators out there and, frankly, they would appreciate more distance being put between the way they handle business and what's being discussed here.

 

A little surprised by your answer. I thought we were discussing HOS and there needs to be more issues than what has been discussed so far. MightyJohnny kept referring to "the list" of issues. I agree on the PL and I do not see how I am diminishing anything.

 

 

When someone says he's got issues with delivering items to several people, it doesn't help clarify the scope of people impacted by calling something like the Medina sketch opp a "single" instance.

 

There's something like 10 sketches that have been done, completed, and waiting to be sent to CGC to make it back into the hands of the people who bought and paid for them long long ago.

 

They are ALL impacted, they all have an issue, gripe, and are in need to Menace to get off the pot and do what was promised. Every single person has an individual agreement with Menace. Each one paid, individually, for the service that was promised. Each one of them is owed, individually, the full and complete service they bought and paid for without unreasonable delay.

 

All I meant was, calling the sketch opp. with anywhere from 6-10 people waiting, unreasonably, for the books to get sent to CGC just "one" issue, gives the reader the impression that it's just one small problem. It's more effective, to determine the scope of what needs to be done to help these people to not lump things into a pile if the lumping leads to calling something like the Medina sketch opp. just one issue.

 

It's not your intention to do so, but that's what's coming across by fighting the semantic definition of "issues". That's all I meant.

 

Interesting.

 

In the context of a HOS discussion I think it is very relevant to differentiate. 10 different transactions all with the same undesireable result could be worthy of HOS while this one issue affecting 10 is not.

 

He should be on the PL until he makes it right. There is nothing I have seen posted here to suggest his intention is to rip people off.

 

 

Well, in both cases it's not the 10 different transactions that differentiate between PL and HOS. It's whether or not they can be rectified and how they can be rectified.

 

If he does his job, and delivers as was promised, then he can remain off/ be removed from the PL. I think that's true in either instance you mention.

 

Now if he were to thumb his nose at the boards, and the people he owes, and refuse to correct his behavior (basically if he took the cash and ran) then it would be HOS material.

 

I agree it doesn't seem to be his intention to rip people off. It seems he bit off way more than he could chew in several instances and that led to him not handle any of the responsibilities with the level of care and professionalism that the SS program demands of its facilitators and witnesses.

 

That's why I believe that the failure to perform on Menace's part is something that is PL worthy until everyone gets what's promised and that then his participation in future opportunities through the SS program should be scrutinized heavily from top to bottom.

 

It's hard to discuss when we agree.

[Park]

Putting Menace on the HoS list pretty much discredits the validity of the entire list.

Let's just do away with the regular PL and put everyone in the HoS.

 

 

Isn't the PL already a joke? When someone can be on that list multiple times and all it takes to get off is money or books, I can't take it seriously.

 

Not everything is black and white.

 

The PL isn't black and white either. It doesn't stop anyone from buying or selling. I look at it as a tool to help complete a transaction or a warning to other buyers or sellers or maybe even a way to shame someone into doing the right thing.

 

I would look less at the probation list and the process itself as a failure and more at the people that allow sellers or buyers to continue doing unethical, shady things as the failure. The PL list can be a tool to call out these people but not buying/selling from/to them in the first place is the better answer.

 

 

[comix4fun]

 

 

While I agree this isn't a HOS issue, it's certainly a PL issue, and until we fully understand how many people are impacted, we aren't grasping the solution because we're not identifying the problem.

 

Or more simply, Menace dug this hole for himself, a lot of people are impacted and he doesn't need anyone diminishing the perceived reach of his own actions by splitting the hairs between "ramifications" and "issues".

 

There are many solid, responsible, earnest facilitators out there and, frankly, they would appreciate more distance being put between the way they handle business and what's being discussed here.

 

A little surprised by your answer. I thought we were discussing HOS and there needs to be more issues than what has been discussed so far. MightyJohnny kept referring to "the list" of issues. I agree on the PL and I do not see how I am diminishing anything.

 

 

When someone says he's got issues with delivering items to several people, it doesn't help clarify the scope of people impacted by calling something like the Medina sketch opp a "single" instance.

 

There's something like 10 sketches that have been done, completed, and waiting to be sent to CGC to make it back into the hands of the people who bought and paid for them long long ago.

 

They are ALL impacted, they all have an issue, gripe, and are in need to Menace to get off the pot and do what was promised. Every single person has an individual agreement with Menace. Each one paid, individually, for the service that was promised. Each one of them is owed, individually, the full and complete service they bought and paid for without unreasonable delay.

 

All I meant was, calling the sketch opp. with anywhere from 6-10 people waiting, unreasonably, for the books to get sent to CGC just "one" issue, gives the reader the impression that it's just one small problem. It's more effective, to determine the scope of what needs to be done to help these people to not lump things into a pile if the lumping leads to calling something like the Medina sketch opp. just one issue.

 

It's not your intention to do so, but that's what's coming across by fighting the semantic definition of "issues". That's all I meant.

 

Interesting.

 

In the context of a HOS discussion I think it is very relevant to differentiate. 10 different transactions all with the same undesireable result could be worthy of HOS while this one issue affecting 10 is not.

 

He should be on the PL until he makes it right. There is nothing I have seen posted here to suggest his intention is to rip people off.

 

 

 

While I agree this isn't a HOS issue, it's certainly a PL issue, and until we fully understand how many people are impacted, we aren't grasping the solution because we're not identifying the problem.

 

Or more simply, Menace dug this hole for himself, a lot of people are impacted and he doesn't need anyone diminishing the perceived reach of his own actions by splitting the hairs between "ramifications" and "issues".

 

There are many solid, responsible, earnest facilitators out there and, frankly, they would appreciate more distance being put between the way they handle business and what's being discussed here.

 

A little surprised by your answer. I thought we were discussing HOS and there needs to be more issues than what has been discussed so far. MightyJohnny kept referring to "the list" of issues. I agree on the PL and I do not see how I am diminishing anything.

 

 

When someone says he's got issues with delivering items to several people, it doesn't help clarify the scope of people impacted by calling something like the Medina sketch opp a "single" instance.

 

There's something like 10 sketches that have been done, completed, and waiting to be sent to CGC to make it back into the hands of the people who bought and paid for them long long ago.

 

They are ALL impacted, they all have an issue, gripe, and are in need to Menace to get off the pot and do what was promised. Every single person has an individual agreement with Menace. Each one paid, individually, for the service that was promised. Each one of them is owed, individually, the full and complete service they bought and paid for without unreasonable delay.

 

All I meant was, calling the sketch opp. with anywhere from 6-10 people waiting, unreasonably, for the books to get sent to CGC just "one" issue, gives the reader the impression that it's just one small problem. It's more effective, to determine the scope of what needs to be done to help these people to not lump things into a pile if the lumping leads to calling something like the Medina sketch opp. just one issue.

 

It's not your intention to do so, but that's what's coming across by fighting the semantic definition of "issues". That's all I meant.

 

It seems like that until any of those other 9 people complain about the sketch opp, its still only one instance of probation list worthy behavior.

 

I do agree that if the opp is late in being processed by Menace that it will indeed affect ALL 10 people... its just that until let's say person #8 comes forward and states "yes I've been screwed", then he technically hasn't been.

 

Perhaps the other nine are willing to be more patient... or maybe each one knows Menace personally and realizes he will come through. Possibly he contacted each one of them via email and forgot about JDUB... no one knows.

 

Based on Menace's willingness to refund J DUB's money after it was brought here should at least let those other nine people know that the probability of getting their opp ...or at least their money back... is high.

 

 

a few things.

 

1) If anyone were to check the Medina sketch opp thread they would see several different people asking, demanding, wanting their books back and wondering where they are, what the status is, asking why Medina posted scans of completed books months ago and they don't have anything to show for it. There are plenty of people concerned, worried, asking questions and (until the PL list was brought up ) not getting any answers.

 

2) I disagree, that when a facilitator accepts money for services and then fails to perform that service in a reasonable, professional and timely manner, that the customer has not been "screwed" until they complain about it. They are screwed from the moment their fully paid for service is not performed in the manner promised and in the manner expected. They don't have to be aware or vocal about being screwed to, in fact, be screwed.

 

One would hope a facilitator willing to take on this responsibility would not let the issue go to this extent before having a refund dragged from them to avoid repercussions. One would hope that when there is still work to be done, work the facilitator took on willingly and intentionally that they would not "check out" from the boards and take a break when the paid for services have not been completed.

 

I think the probability of the others getting their sketches, paid for services, or refunds is much much higher if the entire opportunity is put under the microscope and the ramifications of non-performance are held directly over that person's head.

[comix4fun]

 

 

While I agree this isn't a HOS issue, it's certainly a PL issue, and until we fully understand how many people are impacted, we aren't grasping the solution because we're not identifying the problem.

 

Or more simply, Menace dug this hole for himself, a lot of people are impacted and he doesn't need anyone diminishing the perceived reach of his own actions by splitting the hairs between "ramifications" and "issues".

 

There are many solid, responsible, earnest facilitators out there and, frankly, they would appreciate more distance being put between the way they handle business and what's being discussed here.

 

A little surprised by your answer. I thought we were discussing HOS and there needs to be more issues than what has been discussed so far. MightyJohnny kept referring to "the list" of issues. I agree on the PL and I do not see how I am diminishing anything.

 

 

When someone says he's got issues with delivering items to several people, it doesn't help clarify the scope of people impacted by calling something like the Medina sketch opp a "single" instance.

 

There's something like 10 sketches that have been done, completed, and waiting to be sent to CGC to make it back into the hands of the people who bought and paid for them long long ago.

 

They are ALL impacted, they all have an issue, gripe, and are in need to Menace to get off the pot and do what was promised. Every single person has an individual agreement with Menace. Each one paid, individually, for the service that was promised. Each one of them is owed, individually, the full and complete service they bought and paid for without unreasonable delay.

 

All I meant was, calling the sketch opp. with anywhere from 6-10 people waiting, unreasonably, for the books to get sent to CGC just "one" issue, gives the reader the impression that it's just one small problem. It's more effective, to determine the scope of what needs to be done to help these people to not lump things into a pile if the lumping leads to calling something like the Medina sketch opp. just one issue.

 

It's not your intention to do so, but that's what's coming across by fighting the semantic definition of "issues". That's all I meant.

 

Interesting.

 

In the context of a HOS discussion I think it is very relevant to differentiate. 10 different transactions all with the same undesireable result could be worthy of HOS while this one issue affecting 10 is not.

 

He should be on the PL until he makes it right. There is nothing I have seen posted here to suggest his intention is to rip people off.

 

 

Well, in both cases it's not the 10 different transactions that differentiate between PL and HOS. It's whether or not they can be rectified and how they can be rectified.

 

If he does his job, and delivers as was promised, then he can remain off/ be removed from the PL. I think that's true in either instance you mention.

 

Now if he were to thumb his nose at the boards, and the people he owes, and refuse to correct his behavior (basically if he took the cash and ran) then it would be HOS material.

 

I agree it doesn't seem to be his intention to rip people off. It seems he bit off way more than he could chew in several instances and that led to him not handle any of the responsibilities with the level of care and professionalism that the SS program demands of its facilitators and witnesses.

 

That's why I believe that the failure to perform on Menace's part is something that is PL worthy until everyone gets what's promised and that then his participation in future opportunities through the SS program should be scrutinized heavily from top to bottom.

 

It's hard to discuss when we agree.

 

I was about to say the same thing.

[Bosco685]

 

 

I miss TJ's discussions on here.

[longshot975]

I need to ask a question so that if what i think may happen occurs, what should I do or would it be possibly for a potential buyer to place negative feedback or request you be placed on Probation thread. I had posted a reply to a buyer wanting to purchase a particular item in the WTB thread. The poster was not interested in my offer but I have been hit up by several people since then even one today that is willing to pay a higher price than the original one who since contacting me placed a WTB thread for the offer and has been asking me question after question and has not committed to the sale. Just says he is feeling his offers. If the new buyer ask for the item before this one responds to accepting a price that was made to them 3 days ago, would that upset member be able to place me in probation or hall of shame just some thoughts please so i do not hurt my standing on here.

[Park]

Putting Menace on the HoS list pretty much discredits the validity of the entire list.

Let's just do away with the regular PL and put everyone in the HoS.

 

 

Agreed.

 

I would be more concerned with how CGC is handling this in regards to allowing Menace to continue as a facilitator.

 

The HOS should be reserved for thieves with no remorse. Like Mr. Ticket's best buddy.

 

Allowing personal feelings and mob mentality, which this thread has been devolved into recently, will eventually reduce the PL and the HOS to something of little or no importance.

 

Does this not apply to the solarcadet issue?

 

 

In what way?

 

I agree that there was definitely a mob mentality with solarcadet. At the same time, there were several reasoned discussions in between the pitchforks and torches.

 

Kinda like now.

[N/A]

I need to ask a question so that if what i think may happen occurs, what should I do or would it be possibly for a potential buyer to place negative feedback or request you be placed on Probation thread. I had posted a reply to a buyer wanting to purchase a particular item in the WTB thread. The poster was not interested in my offer but I have been hit up by several people since then even one today that is willing to pay a higher price than the original one who since contacting me placed a WTB thread for the offer and has been asking me question after question and has not committed to the sale. Just says he is feeling his offers. If the new buyer ask for the item before this one responds to accepting a price that was made to them 3 days ago, would that upset member be able to place me in probation or hall of shame just some thoughts please so i do not hurt my standing on here.

 

Assuming the scenario you described is accurate then you have no deal right now and therefore no obligations. No, the "buyer" can't place you on the PL.

[longshot975]

OK thanks for that Branget

[Park]

I need to ask a question so that if what i think may happen occurs, what should I do or would it be possibly for a potential buyer to place negative feedback or request you be placed on Probation thread. I had posted a reply to a buyer wanting to purchase a particular item in the WTB thread. The poster was not interested in my offer but I have been hit up by several people since then even one today that is willing to pay a higher price than the original one who since contacting me placed a WTB thread for the offer and has been asking me question after question and has not committed to the sale. Just says he is feeling his offers. If the new buyer ask for the item before this one responds to accepting a price that was made to them 3 days ago, would that upset member be able to place me in probation or hall of shame just some thoughts please so i do not hurt my standing on here.

 

Assuming the scenario you described is accurate then you have no deal right now and therefore no obligations. No, the "buyer" can't place you on the PL.

 

I am pretty sure that extortion like this is a common practice around here.

[Logan510]

Putting Menace on the HoS list pretty much discredits the validity of the entire list.

Let's just do away with the regular PL and put everyone in the HoS.

 

 

Isn't the PL already a joke? When someone can be on that list multiple times and all it takes to get off is money or books, I can't take it seriously.

 

 

In that way it's just like life. Screw up or screw someone....you make it right, your debt is marked paid.

 

The PL has served as an incentive several times for people to actually follow through because the carrot on the end of the stick is clearing their name off the list.

 

It's valuable from that point of view. Not everyone who's had a bad deal that led to a PL stint in necessarily a bad guy. Not much is served from having a scarlet letter for menial offenses where the offender put the offended into a position of being whole.

 

Some guys may abuse it, but you can't chuck the list entirely when it's worked effectively in many more instances.

 

I wouldn't say the PL is like life. Sometimes if you're caught and make reparations, you still go to jail. I'm not talking about the one timer who let life get in the way or got in over their head and made a mistake and is truly regretful. I'm talking about the people who've been on the list multiple times. Why not have a three strike rule or something?

[Logan510]

Putting Menace on the HoS list pretty much discredits the validity of the entire list.

Let's just do away with the regular PL and put everyone in the HoS.

 

 

Isn't the PL already a joke? When someone can be on that list multiple times and all it takes to get off is money or books, I can't take it seriously.

 

Not everything is black and white.

 

The PL isn't black and white either. It doesn't stop anyone from buying or selling. I look at it as a tool to help complete a transaction or a warning to other buyers or sellers or maybe even a way to shame someone into doing the right thing.

 

I would look less at the probation list and the process itself as a failure and more at the people that allow sellers or buyers to continue doing unethical, shady things as the failure. The PL list can be a tool to call out these people but not buying/selling from/to them in the first place is the better answer.

 

 

If you bought or sold on here I would take this more seriously

[Bio-Rupp]

 

 

While I agree this isn't a HOS issue, it's certainly a PL issue, and until we fully understand how many people are impacted, we aren't grasping the solution because we're not identifying the problem.

 

Or more simply, Menace dug this hole for himself, a lot of people are impacted and he doesn't need anyone diminishing the perceived reach of his own actions by splitting the hairs between "ramifications" and "issues".

 

There are many solid, responsible, earnest facilitators out there and, frankly, they would appreciate more distance being put between the way they handle business and what's being discussed here.

 

A little surprised by your answer. I thought we were discussing HOS and there needs to be more issues than what has been discussed so far. MightyJohnny kept referring to "the list" of issues. I agree on the PL and I do not see how I am diminishing anything.

 

 

When someone says he's got issues with delivering items to several people, it doesn't help clarify the scope of people impacted by calling something like the Medina sketch opp a "single" instance.

 

There's something like 10 sketches that have been done, completed, and waiting to be sent to CGC to make it back into the hands of the people who bought and paid for them long long ago.

 

They are ALL impacted, they all have an issue, gripe, and are in need to Menace to get off the pot and do what was promised. Every single person has an individual agreement with Menace. Each one paid, individually, for the service that was promised. Each one of them is owed, individually, the full and complete service they bought and paid for without unreasonable delay.

 

All I meant was, calling the sketch opp. with anywhere from 6-10 people waiting, unreasonably, for the books to get sent to CGC just "one" issue, gives the reader the impression that it's just one small problem. It's more effective, to determine the scope of what needs to be done to help these people to not lump things into a pile if the lumping leads to calling something like the Medina sketch opp. just one issue.

 

It's not your intention to do so, but that's what's coming across by fighting the semantic definition of "issues". That's all I meant.

 

Interesting.

 

In the context of a HOS discussion I think it is very relevant to differentiate. 10 different transactions all with the same undesireable result could be worthy of HOS while this one issue affecting 10 is not.

 

He should be on the PL until he makes it right. There is nothing I have seen posted here to suggest his intention is to rip people off.

 

 

 

While I agree this isn't a HOS issue, it's certainly a PL issue, and until we fully understand how many people are impacted, we aren't grasping the solution because we're not identifying the problem.

 

Or more simply, Menace dug this hole for himself, a lot of people are impacted and he doesn't need anyone diminishing the perceived reach of his own actions by splitting the hairs between "ramifications" and "issues".

 

There are many solid, responsible, earnest facilitators out there and, frankly, they would appreciate more distance being put between the way they handle business and what's being discussed here.

 

A little surprised by your answer. I thought we were discussing HOS and there needs to be more issues than what has been discussed so far. MightyJohnny kept referring to "the list" of issues. I agree on the PL and I do not see how I am diminishing anything.

 

 

When someone says he's got issues with delivering items to several people, it doesn't help clarify the scope of people impacted by calling something like the Medina sketch opp a "single" instance.

 

There's something like 10 sketches that have been done, completed, and waiting to be sent to CGC to make it back into the hands of the people who bought and paid for them long long ago.

 

They are ALL impacted, they all have an issue, gripe, and are in need to Menace to get off the pot and do what was promised. Every single person has an individual agreement with Menace. Each one paid, individually, for the service that was promised. Each one of them is owed, individually, the full and complete service they bought and paid for without unreasonable delay.

 

All I meant was, calling the sketch opp. with anywhere from 6-10 people waiting, unreasonably, for the books to get sent to CGC just "one" issue, gives the reader the impression that it's just one small problem. It's more effective, to determine the scope of what needs to be done to help these people to not lump things into a pile if the lumping leads to calling something like the Medina sketch opp. just one issue.

 

It's not your intention to do so, but that's what's coming across by fighting the semantic definition of "issues". That's all I meant.

 

It seems like that until any of those other 9 people complain about the sketch opp, its still only one instance of probation list worthy behavior.

 

I do agree that if the opp is late in being processed by Menace that it will indeed affect ALL 10 people... its just that until let's say person #8 comes forward and states "yes I've been screwed", then he technically hasn't been.

 

Perhaps the other nine are willing to be more patient... or maybe each one knows Menace personally and realizes he will come through. Possibly he contacted each one of them via email and forgot about JDUB... no one knows.

 

Based on Menace's willingness to refund J DUB's money after it was brought here should at least let those other nine people know that the probability of getting their opp ...or at least their money back... is high.

 

 

a few things.

 

1) If anyone were to check the Medina sketch opp thread they would see several different people asking, demanding, wanting their books back and wondering where they are, what the status is, asking why Medina posted scans of completed books months ago and they don't have anything to show for it. There are plenty of people concerned, worried, asking questions and (until the PL list was brought up ) not getting any answers.

 

2) I disagree, that when a facilitator accepts money for services and then fails to perform that service in a reasonable, professional and timely manner, that the customer has not been "screwed" until they complain about it. They are screwed from the moment their fully paid for service is not performed in the manner promised and in the manner expected. They don't have to be aware or vocal about being screwed to, in fact, be screwed.

 

One would hope a facilitator willing to take on this responsibility would not let the issue go to this extent before having a refund dragged from them to avoid repercussions. One would hope that when there is still work to be done, work the facilitator took on willingly and intentionally that they would not "check out" from the boards and take a break when the paid for services have not been completed.

 

I think the probability of the others getting their sketches, paid for services, or refunds is much much higher if the entire opportunity is put under the microscope and the ramifications of non-performance are held directly over that person's head.

 

All valid and good discussion points.

 

On a related note, I think we can agree that if all 10 get refunded any monies out of pocket that Menace isn't a "thief"... just an unorganized businessman who should take the time to re-evaluate his position as a facilitator of SS CGC books.

 

... at least until he actually becomes a thief.

[MetalPSI]

Putting Menace on the HoS list pretty much discredits the validity of the entire list.

Let's just do away with the regular PL and put everyone in the HoS.

 

 

 

That's the problem with lumping the lazy, unprofessional, and lax with the truly dishonest, evil and detrimental.

 

It makes the real bad guys not look as bad, and that's never good.

 

................. It's an interesting point....

 

[comix4fun]

 

 

While I agree this isn't a HOS issue, it's certainly a PL issue, and until we fully understand how many people are impacted, we aren't grasping the solution because we're not identifying the problem.

 

Or more simply, Menace dug this hole for himself, a lot of people are impacted and he doesn't need anyone diminishing the perceived reach of his own actions by splitting the hairs between "ramifications" and "issues".

 

There are many solid, responsible, earnest facilitators out there and, frankly, they would appreciate more distance being put between the way they handle business and what's being discussed here.

 

A little surprised by your answer. I thought we were discussing HOS and there needs to be more issues than what has been discussed so far. MightyJohnny kept referring to "the list" of issues. I agree on the PL and I do not see how I am diminishing anything.

 

 

When someone says he's got issues with delivering items to several people, it doesn't help clarify the scope of people impacted by calling something like the Medina sketch opp a "single" instance.

 

There's something like 10 sketches that have been done, completed, and waiting to be sent to CGC to make it back into the hands of the people who bought and paid for them long long ago.

 

They are ALL impacted, they all have an issue, gripe, and are in need to Menace to get off the pot and do what was promised. Every single person has an individual agreement with Menace. Each one paid, individually, for the service that was promised. Each one of them is owed, individually, the full and complete service they bought and paid for without unreasonable delay.

 

All I meant was, calling the sketch opp. with anywhere from 6-10 people waiting, unreasonably, for the books to get sent to CGC just "one" issue, gives the reader the impression that it's just one small problem. It's more effective, to determine the scope of what needs to be done to help these people to not lump things into a pile if the lumping leads to calling something like the Medina sketch opp. just one issue.

 

It's not your intention to do so, but that's what's coming across by fighting the semantic definition of "issues". That's all I meant.

 

Interesting.

 

In the context of a HOS discussion I think it is very relevant to differentiate. 10 different transactions all with the same undesireable result could be worthy of HOS while this one issue affecting 10 is not.

 

He should be on the PL until he makes it right. There is nothing I have seen posted here to suggest his intention is to rip people off.

 

 

 

While I agree this isn't a HOS issue, it's certainly a PL issue, and until we fully understand how many people are impacted, we aren't grasping the solution because we're not identifying the problem.

 

Or more simply, Menace dug this hole for himself, a lot of people are impacted and he doesn't need anyone diminishing the perceived reach of his own actions by splitting the hairs between "ramifications" and "issues".

 

There are many solid, responsible, earnest facilitators out there and, frankly, they would appreciate more distance being put between the way they handle business and what's being discussed here.

 

A little surprised by your answer. I thought we were discussing HOS and there needs to be more issues than what has been discussed so far. MightyJohnny kept referring to "the list" of issues. I agree on the PL and I do not see how I am diminishing anything.

 

 

When someone says he's got issues with delivering items to several people, it doesn't help clarify the scope of people impacted by calling something like the Medina sketch opp a "single" instance.

 

There's something like 10 sketches that have been done, completed, and waiting to be sent to CGC to make it back into the hands of the people who bought and paid for them long long ago.

 

They are ALL impacted, they all have an issue, gripe, and are in need to Menace to get off the pot and do what was promised. Every single person has an individual agreement with Menace. Each one paid, individually, for the service that was promised. Each one of them is owed, individually, the full and complete service they bought and paid for without unreasonable delay.

 

All I meant was, calling the sketch opp. with anywhere from 6-10 people waiting, unreasonably, for the books to get sent to CGC just "one" issue, gives the reader the impression that it's just one small problem. It's more effective, to determine the scope of what needs to be done to help these people to not lump things into a pile if the lumping leads to calling something like the Medina sketch opp. just one issue.

 

It's not your intention to do so, but that's what's coming across by fighting the semantic definition of "issues". That's all I meant.

 

It seems like that until any of those other 9 people complain about the sketch opp, its still only one instance of probation list worthy behavior.

 

I do agree that if the opp is late in being processed by Menace that it will indeed affect ALL 10 people... its just that until let's say person #8 comes forward and states "yes I've been screwed", then he technically hasn't been.

 

Perhaps the other nine are willing to be more patient... or maybe each one knows Menace personally and realizes he will come through. Possibly he contacted each one of them via email and forgot about JDUB... no one knows.

 

Based on Menace's willingness to refund J DUB's money after it was brought here should at least let those other nine people know that the probability of getting their opp ...or at least their money back... is high.

 

 

a few things.

 

1) If anyone were to check the Medina sketch opp thread they would see several different people asking, demanding, wanting their books back and wondering where they are, what the status is, asking why Medina posted scans of completed books months ago and they don't have anything to show for it. There are plenty of people concerned, worried, asking questions and (until the PL list was brought up ) not getting any answers.

 

2) I disagree, that when a facilitator accepts money for services and then fails to perform that service in a reasonable, professional and timely manner, that the customer has not been "screwed" until they complain about it. They are screwed from the moment their fully paid for service is not performed in the manner promised and in the manner expected. They don't have to be aware or vocal about being screwed to, in fact, be screwed.

 

One would hope a facilitator willing to take on this responsibility would not let the issue go to this extent before having a refund dragged from them to avoid repercussions. One would hope that when there is still work to be done, work the facilitator took on willingly and intentionally that they would not "check out" from the boards and take a break when the paid for services have not been completed.

 

I think the probability of the others getting their sketches, paid for services, or refunds is much much higher if the entire opportunity is put under the microscope and the ramifications of non-performance are held directly over that person's head.

 

All valid and good discussion points.

 

On a related note, I think we can agree that if all 10 get refunded any monies out of pocket that Menace isn't a "thief"... just an unorganized businessman who should take the time to re-evaluate his position as a facilitator of SS CGC books.

 

 

100% I agree.

[Park]

 

 

While I agree this isn't a HOS issue, it's certainly a PL issue, and until we fully understand how many people are impacted, we aren't grasping the solution because we're not identifying the problem.

 

Or more simply, Menace dug this hole for himself, a lot of people are impacted and he doesn't need anyone diminishing the perceived reach of his own actions by splitting the hairs between "ramifications" and "issues".

 

There are many solid, responsible, earnest facilitators out there and, frankly, they would appreciate more distance being put between the way they handle business and what's being discussed here.

 

A little surprised by your answer. I thought we were discussing HOS and there needs to be more issues than what has been discussed so far. MightyJohnny kept referring to "the list" of issues. I agree on the PL and I do not see how I am diminishing anything.

 

 

When someone says he's got issues with delivering items to several people, it doesn't help clarify the scope of people impacted by calling something like the Medina sketch opp a "single" instance.

 

There's something like 10 sketches that have been done, completed, and waiting to be sent to CGC to make it back into the hands of the people who bought and paid for them long long ago.

 

They are ALL impacted, they all have an issue, gripe, and are in need to Menace to get off the pot and do what was promised. Every single person has an individual agreement with Menace. Each one paid, individually, for the service that was promised. Each one of them is owed, individually, the full and complete service they bought and paid for without unreasonable delay.

 

All I meant was, calling the sketch opp. with anywhere from 6-10 people waiting, unreasonably, for the books to get sent to CGC just "one" issue, gives the reader the impression that it's just one small problem. It's more effective, to determine the scope of what needs to be done to help these people to not lump things into a pile if the lumping leads to calling something like the Medina sketch opp. just one issue.

 

It's not your intention to do so, but that's what's coming across by fighting the semantic definition of "issues". That's all I meant.

 

Interesting.

 

In the context of a HOS discussion I think it is very relevant to differentiate. 10 different transactions all with the same undesireable result could be worthy of HOS while this one issue affecting 10 is not.

 

He should be on the PL until he makes it right. There is nothing I have seen posted here to suggest his intention is to rip people off.

 

 

 

While I agree this isn't a HOS issue, it's certainly a PL issue, and until we fully understand how many people are impacted, we aren't grasping the solution because we're not identifying the problem.

 

Or more simply, Menace dug this hole for himself, a lot of people are impacted and he doesn't need anyone diminishing the perceived reach of his own actions by splitting the hairs between "ramifications" and "issues".

 

There are many solid, responsible, earnest facilitators out there and, frankly, they would appreciate more distance being put between the way they handle business and what's being discussed here.

 

A little surprised by your answer. I thought we were discussing HOS and there needs to be more issues than what has been discussed so far. MightyJohnny kept referring to "the list" of issues. I agree on the PL and I do not see how I am diminishing anything.

 

 

When someone says he's got issues with delivering items to several people, it doesn't help clarify the scope of people impacted by calling something like the Medina sketch opp a "single" instance.

 

There's something like 10 sketches that have been done, completed, and waiting to be sent to CGC to make it back into the hands of the people who bought and paid for them long long ago.

 

They are ALL impacted, they all have an issue, gripe, and are in need to Menace to get off the pot and do what was promised. Every single person has an individual agreement with Menace. Each one paid, individually, for the service that was promised. Each one of them is owed, individually, the full and complete service they bought and paid for without unreasonable delay.

 

All I meant was, calling the sketch opp. with anywhere from 6-10 people waiting, unreasonably, for the books to get sent to CGC just "one" issue, gives the reader the impression that it's just one small problem. It's more effective, to determine the scope of what needs to be done to help these people to not lump things into a pile if the lumping leads to calling something like the Medina sketch opp. just one issue.

 

It's not your intention to do so, but that's what's coming across by fighting the semantic definition of "issues". That's all I meant.

 

It seems like that until any of those other 9 people complain about the sketch opp, its still only one instance of probation list worthy behavior.

 

I do agree that if the opp is late in being processed by Menace that it will indeed affect ALL 10 people... its just that until let's say person #8 comes forward and states "yes I've been screwed", then he technically hasn't been.

 

Perhaps the other nine are willing to be more patient... or maybe each one knows Menace personally and realizes he will come through. Possibly he contacted each one of them via email and forgot about JDUB... no one knows.

 

Based on Menace's willingness to refund J DUB's money after it was brought here should at least let those other nine people know that the probability of getting their opp ...or at least their money back... is high.

 

 

a few things.

 

1) If anyone were to check the Medina sketch opp thread they would see several different people asking, demanding, wanting their books back and wondering where they are, what the status is, asking why Medina posted scans of completed books months ago and they don't have anything to show for it. There are plenty of people concerned, worried, asking questions and (until the PL list was brought up ) not getting any answers.

 

2) I disagree, that when a facilitator accepts money for services and then fails to perform that service in a reasonable, professional and timely manner, that the customer has not been "screwed" until they complain about it. They are screwed from the moment their fully paid for service is not performed in the manner promised and in the manner expected. They don't have to be aware or vocal about being screwed to, in fact, be screwed.

 

One would hope a facilitator willing to take on this responsibility would not let the issue go to this extent before having a refund dragged from them to avoid repercussions. One would hope that when there is still work to be done, work the facilitator took on willingly and intentionally that they would not "check out" from the boards and take a break when the paid for services have not been completed.

 

I think the probability of the others getting their sketches, paid for services, or refunds is much much higher if the entire opportunity is put under the microscope and the ramifications of non-performance are held directly over that person's head.

 

All valid and good discussion points.

 

On a related note, I think we can agree that if all 10 get refunded any monies out of pocket that Menace isn't a "thief"... just an unorganized businessman who should take the time to re-evaluate his position as a facilitator of SS CGC books.

 

 

100% I agree.

 

Devils advocate (aka Mitch) could say the same thing about Beerbohm.

 

Granted that it sounds like Bob has been doing it for forty years but...

[Park]

Putting Menace on the HoS list pretty much discredits the validity of the entire list.

Let's just do away with the regular PL and put everyone in the HoS.

 

 

Isn't the PL already a joke? When someone can be on that list multiple times and all it takes to get off is money or books, I can't take it seriously.

 

Not everything is black and white.

 

The PL isn't black and white either. It doesn't stop anyone from buying or selling. I look at it as a tool to help complete a transaction or a warning to other buyers or sellers or maybe even a way to shame someone into doing the right thing.

 

I would look less at the probation list and the process itself as a failure and more at the people that allow sellers or buyers to continue doing unethical, shady things as the failure. The PL list can be a tool to call out these people but not buying/selling from/to them in the first place is the better answer.

 

 

If you bought or sold on here I would take this more seriously

 

I do buy a little bit but it is a valid point.

 

At the same time, someone that doesn't utilize this place for buying and selling consistently can bring a different perspective.

 

[Bosco685]

So what was the final decision? Does the PL-HOS still serve a purpose?

[N/A]

HOS does for me. PL not so much.

[Logan510]

Putting Menace on the HoS list pretty much discredits the validity of the entire list.

Let's just do away with the regular PL and put everyone in the HoS.

 

 

Isn't the PL already a joke? When someone can be on that list multiple times and all it takes to get off is money or books, I can't take it seriously.

 

Not everything is black and white.

 

The PL isn't black and white either. It doesn't stop anyone from buying or selling. I look at it as a tool to help complete a transaction or a warning to other buyers or sellers or maybe even a way to shame someone into doing the right thing.

 

I would look less at the probation list and the process itself as a failure and more at the people that allow sellers or buyers to continue doing unethical, shady things as the failure. The PL list can be a tool to call out these people but not buying/selling from/to them in the first place is the better answer.

 

 

If you bought or sold on here I would take this more seriously

 

I do buy a little bit but it is a valid point.

 

At the same time, someone that doesn't utilize this place for buying and selling consistently can bring a different perspective.

 

You're like a living, breathing Kaizen