PROBATION DISCUSSIONS 21 21

[Bosco685]

So pointing out a HoS member in their sales thread is strike worthy? I'm sorry but that's up.

 

Even if someone was negotiating a transaction openly with a HOS, you are not allowed to point out their status. It is upon all members to reference the HOS-PL.

[crassus]

So pointing out a HoS member in their sales thread is strike worthy? I'm sorry but that's up.

 

Even if someone was negotiating a transaction openly with a HOS, you are not allowed to point out their status. It is upon all members to reference the HOS-PL.

 

I assume one could still PM the Boardie with a personal FYI, yes?

[Bosco685]

So pointing out a HoS member in their sales thread is strike worthy? I'm sorry but that's up.

 

Even if someone was negotiating a transaction openly with a HOS, you are not allowed to point out their status. It is upon all members to reference the HOS-PL.

 

I assume one could still PM the Boardie with a personal FYI, yes?

 

[DiceX]

So pointing out a HoS member in their sales thread is strike worthy? I'm sorry but that's up.

 

Even if someone was negotiating a transaction openly with a HOS, you are not allowed to point out their status. It is upon all members to reference the HOS-PL.

 

I assume one could still PM the Boardie with a personal FYI, yes?

 

I was not warned against that.

 

 

[Speedy-D]

So pointing out a HoS member in their sales thread is strike worthy? I'm sorry but that's up.

 

Even if someone was negotiating a transaction openly with a HOS, you are not allowed to point out their status. It is upon all members to reference the HOS-PL.

That's up.

[Iceman399]

So pointing out a HoS member in their sales thread is strike worthy? I'm sorry but that's up.

 

Even if someone was negotiating a transaction openly with a HOS, you are not allowed to point out their status. It is upon all members to reference the HOS-PL.

 

I assume one could still PM the Boardie with a personal FYI, yes?

 

Hard to warn someone if the thread is in the open but someone is PMing to get a better deal or time payments or remain anonymous and no one knows about it.

[marmat]

 

Did the OP find someone to press his 30 books?

 

Of course I did

 

 

From THIS THREAD

[mrwoogieman]

So pointing out a HoS member in their sales thread is strike worthy? I'm sorry but that's up.

 

Even if someone was negotiating a transaction openly with a HOS, you are not allowed to point out their status. It is upon all members to reference the HOS-PL.

 

I assume one could still PM the Boardie with a personal FYI, yes?

 

I was not warned against that.

 

 

I've PM'ed at least one buyer and told him to back out of a sale before it was too late when I saw a "misplaced" .

 

Was thanked profusely.

 

[revat]

you could just post in some HOS or PL person's thread a popcorn, but in your sig have a big link to the appropriate PL or HOS list.

[Iceman399]

you could just post in some HOS or PL person's thread a popcorn, but in your sig have a big link to the appropriate PL or HOS list.

 

Haha I like it

[Hado]

Did the OP find someone to press his 30 books?

 

Of course I did

 

 

From THIS THREAD

After joecgc's notice, and anyone reading the thread is now aware of SC1's status, is the rest necessary?

 

And I think that's what will happen if reminders are posted in active sales threads. One person posting a non aggressive reminder is rarely where it ends.

Edited January 15, 2014 by Hado

[mrwoogieman]

I think the biggest challenge with this consolidated historic list (which has been talked about for a few years) would be the hard feelings it can cause, which you are experiencing right now.

 

When reviewing that list, there are long-time members that show up once years ago. So when they see their one-time incident being brought up after all these years, naturally they are not going to appreciate this.

 

If any list is posted (including the one you created), better to drop the one-timers just to be fair. Otherwise, how do we ever let people move on when they never had another issue ever again?

Again, I'm not advocating anything at this point...I'll leave that discussion to those of you who have been discussing this for years already. As I said, hopefully seeing the PL activity summary will be helpful when that discussion recurs.

 

edit: also, notice that I intentionally didn't label this analysis as a "list" - I certainly didn't suggest that any connotation be attached to it, such as "Tool Shed", "Problem Children", "Scarlet Letter Recipients", or anything like that...it's just a neutral summary of what has factually happened on the PL since inception. In fact, if you read back you'll see that I brought this up as as an alternative to such lists that were being suggested.

 

I will say, however, that it seems like the principle at issue here is one of information transparency. Should this information be transparent or opaque? I think it's an overstatement to say that making the historical PL activity transparent will prevent people from moving on. For example, seeing a long-time member on there years ago would not have any effect on my willingness to deal with them (as an aside, one of my large early purchases on these boards was from one such boardie that is involved in this discussion). There are comparisons/analogies that can be drawn between this and criminal records out in real society, but I'll leave those for the lawyers...

 

Really, man. Drop it.

 

 

How about if we replace each person's name on the HOS and PL as a clickable link to the portion of the thread discussing their transgression.

 

One thing, it will give the BST forum police something useful to do.

 

 

Edowens: Use your enthusiasm for good, not pot-stirring...or torch-carrying...or whatever.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[EC ed]

Edowens: Use your enthusiasm for good, not pot-stirring...or torch-carrying...or whatever.

mrwoogieman: The thing of it is, that's sincerely what I'm trying to do. I don't know how many different ways I can try to say that that is my intention. However, it seems that every time I come into a discussion thread and attempt to help steer the discussion in what seems to me to be a more substantive direction, my attempts get characterized by some as pot-stirring, torch-carrying, inciting controversy, etc. I tell you what - it just seems that I haven't figured out how to substantively contribute to a discussion thread around here without someone characterizing my attempted contribution in this fashion. I'll keep trying, but it's proving difficult. Take this latest discussion...I come in and try to offer an alternative way of thinking about a potential solution to a debate that has apparently been going on here for years that was already being actively discussed in this thread, and I'm suddenly stirring the pot. Geesh.

[slym2none]

 

::

 

 

 

-slym

[Iceman399]

 

::

 

 

 

-slym

 

I like that icon

[Bosco685]

[Speedy-D]

Edowens: Use your enthusiasm for good, not pot-stirring...or torch-carrying...or whatever.

mrwoogieman: The thing of it is, that's sincerely what I'm trying to do. I don't know how many different ways I can try to say that that is my intention. However, it seems that every time I come into a discussion thread and attempt to help steer the discussion in what seems to me to be a more substantive direction, my attempts get characterized by some as pot-stirring, torch-carrying, inciting controversy, etc. I tell you what - it just seems that I haven't figured out how to substantively contribute to a discussion thread around here without someone characterizing my attempted contribution in this fashion. I'll keep trying, but it's proving difficult. Take this latest discussion...I come in and try to offer an alternative way of thinking about a potential solution to a debate that has apparently been going on here for years that was already being actively discussed in this thread, and I'm suddenly stirring the pot. Geesh.

It's just that most people don't think we need a third list and don't need to stigmatize anyone who's gotten themselves off the PL.

[Jimmy Linguini]

Have the mods ever suggested the PL was a good idea?

 

They have nothing to do with it, so getting mad about getting a strike for mentioning a PL or HOS member is just like getting mad about getting a strike for thread-disruption related to the locked thread challenge.

 

The PL list is great - but am I missing where someone with power at CGC said "yes, we should run with the PL / Hos system"?

[Speedy-D]

Have the mods ever suggested the PL was a good idea?

 

They have nothing to do with it, so getting mad about getting a strike for mentioning a PL or HOS member is just like getting mad about getting a strike for thread-disruption related to the locked thread challenge.

 

The PL list is great - but am I missing where someone with power at CGC said "yes, we should run with the PL / Hos system"?

They have gotten behind it, and they have a little PSA, with a link directly to the list, at the top of every sales page that says

 

A probation list for bad transactions is maintained by the community.

I'd call that at least a tacit endorsement.

[Jimmy Linguini]

Have the mods ever suggested the PL was a good idea?

 

They have nothing to do with it, so getting mad about getting a strike for mentioning a PL or HOS member is just like getting mad about getting a strike for thread-disruption related to the locked thread challenge.

 

The PL list is great - but am I missing where someone with power at CGC said "yes, we should run with the PL / Hos system"?

They have gotten behind it, and they have a little PSA, with a link directly to the list, at the top of every sales page that says

 

A probation list for bad transactions is maintained by the community.

I'd call that at least a tacit endorsement.

 

Well it looks like, as always, my opinion and thoughts are irrelevant. (thumbs u