PROBATION DISCUSSIONS 21 21

[N/A]

This is not supposed to be a high pressure cut throat kind of place. We are a community of "collectors".

 

This is where I'm coming from as well. I've never tried to force someone to sell me a comic. It's weird.

 

It is very weird but it is the norm for theses boards. Half the PL list is buyers that didn't follow through.

 

Paraphrasing recap/comprehension analysis:

 

Ryan: I would never force a seller to sell me a book.

Branget: That is why so many buyers are on the PL.

 

 

Your comprehension needs work.

[N/A]

This is not supposed to be a high pressure cut throat kind of place. We are a community of "collectors".

 

This is where I'm coming from as well. I've never tried to force someone to sell me a comic. It's weird.

 

The idea that someone pops in to my sales thread that hasn't seen an update in a couple months and posts the on a book and I'm required to honor that because I specifically didn't close the thread is absolute wildly_fanciful_statement.

 

These boards aren't ebay where books are listed for weeks and months and years. This isn't a dealer's website. This is, as Sharon said, a community of collectors.

 

It was just over a day.

 

In this case, yes. However, that poll suggests a much longer time frame.

If someone pops the BIN on a three year old sales thread and expects that the book is still available, then that's not an idea rooted in reality. Seriously, who does that? Oh wait, it's happened from time to time.

 

I read the poll as 7 days. Gotta love the world of stats.

 

And it all comes down to adding more rules where they might not be needed. Was this an issue before Jawn/Kid? (I don't know, I'm asking)

 

I view it as a general understanding. We don't need more rules. 99% of sellers would have just sold the book and 99% of buyers would have just looked for another copy. I see this as a point of reference only.

[comix4fun]

Only jawn can answer that. I PM'ed him with a link to this discussion. If he doesn't care about the nomination, let him say that.

 

I don't think anyone wants to put words in someone else's mouth. If jawn don't care, neither will. (thumbs u

I have started a new job and haven't had as much time to be on here, topped with a power outage last night.

I do stand behind my nomination. My frustration was that it didn't mean anything to him since he just took the book to Ebay and could have cared less. I really don't think the price was that far out of line and stick by what I did. He was bartering and he knows it.

 

 

If I was "bartering" I wouldn't have said this

 

How is saying my asking price is too low a bartering technique?

 

You knew I wasn't selling at that price and still tried to claim it

 

As i've said before this is only an issue because I didn't take the book down like I should have thats it

 

My question is, with all due respect, how experienced in the comic collectables (and collectables market in general) the seller is. I've been collecting for 20 years just about, been doing the convention scene for about 10. During that time dealers have used the following (or some variation of them) techniques more times than I can count:

"I'm already taking a loss on the book as it's priced, I'll just hang on to it I guess."

"Have you looked at eBay recently, at that price I'm practically giving you a profit, I might as well keep it and sell it there" (one of my all time favorites personally)

"That book has sentimental value to me, Id really rather hold on to it"

"Eh it's already x% under guide"

 

Notice that almost all of those statements are saying that I priced the book too low, with the intent of soliciting higher numbers/come up to sticker price. That is the reason so many people are jumping on you and saying that it is a bargaining technique, because it is one we've seen hundreds/thousands of times.

 

There are two things not clearly stated in the PM, together the intimation is clear.

 

Sellers desire to hold onto the book.

Sellers desire to get a better price than already attached to the book in his week old sales thread.

 

Misreading the first as a negotiation technique is wishful thinking at best when the second comment is considered.

 

 

 

Actually, the second reveals the first to be a fallacious construct created to help accomplish the second, especially in light of the seller's immediate lack of "holding".

[comix4fun]

This is not supposed to be a high pressure cut throat kind of place. We are a community of "collectors".

 

This is where I'm coming from as well. I've never tried to force someone to sell me a comic. It's weird.

 

The idea that someone pops in to my sales thread that hasn't seen an update in a couple months and posts the on a book and I'm required to honor that because I specifically didn't close the thread is absolute wildly_fanciful_statement.

 

These boards aren't ebay where books are listed for weeks and months and years. This isn't a dealer's website. This is, as Sharon said, a community of collectors.

 

 

 

I would like to take this opportunity to go on the record that ALL of my past sales threads are CLOSED.

 

 

[jsilverjanet]

 

I would like to take this opportunity to go on the records that ALL of my past sales threads are CLOSED.

 

+1

[Chaseman210]

Ryan, I'd agree with you IF this was an old thread and an oversight regarding closing it down.

 

That's NOT the case here though. Before jawn added the in the thread, he had been discussing the book with oceanavekid for a full day. Meaning IF the thread really was closed, why didn't he update it as such if that was his intention? The rules are clear that sellers are responsible for their threads. He didn't want it closed.

 

This isn't a long-time, respected seller. This is a guy who has constantly bent and broken the rules. He has had two or three recent sales threads pulled by the kids for simultaneously having books for sale here and listed on eBay. In one instance he had a sales thread pulled, he complained about the mods having a personal agenda against him and he had no more books listed on eBay while starting a new sales thread. Guess what - the books he listed here were STILL up for sale on eBay, this guy is either the dumbest guy to sell things or he is consciously and repeatedly breaking the rules. The sales thread being left open was not an oversight in this instance.

 

Justin... do you think this really matters in this case? I can send you an immediate link to a "long-time respected seller" who not only blatently broke the rules... but contacted a friend in moderation to allow him to bypass the rules

 

I'm not talking about board etiquette or personal opinions... I'm talking about a actual stated, written rule that was altered based on personal bias/preferential treatment to another member.

 

The only reason this is allowed to happen is mainly because someone will say "hey you shouldn't mess with them... they are a long time respected member"... plus they have lots of friends on here that will bombard you with that simple statement... leaving the person who wants to do the right thing perplexed to say the least.

 

Is it fair that a "long time respected seller" gets a pass and a n00b trying to get things right in his first three or four sales doesn't?

 

Jawn believes he is in the right. Oceanavekid believes he is. There is no answer to this one I don't believe because it's been discussed ad nauseam.

 

Perhaps the easiest way for us to try to find an answer is to PM sellers with threads that are one week and older to see if their threads are still open if they have no notation stating they are closed.

 

Any one of us can get the answer from them via PM. If they imply it's closed by stating "that thread is a week old so I would assume it's closed" and we then post in their threads for books they still have listed for sale... are they still on the hook? What if they say "I think I sold half of those" and we then go place a on one that sold already. Can we hold that seller to the sale?

 

Over the weekend, maybe we should randomly experiment... not to force a sale... but just PM some sellers with week or so old sales threads and ask them their opinion on whether or not their sales threads are closed or open

 

 

But if was closed based on being a week old, why didn't Oceanavekid tell Jawn when Jawn was trying to negotiate a price? Instead of saying the thread was closed, Oceanavekid said "I think I'll hold onto it until I get pics" and "I might hold onto it because it's priced too low."

 

The argument of the thread being closed down by default is moot. If it WAS closed, why would the seller continue to PM somebody who is trying to buy the book instead of saying the thread was closed and the books weren't for sale?

Edited June 13, 2014 by chaseman210

[retrothecollector]

 

I would like to take this opportunity to go on the records that ALL of my past sales threads are CLOSED.

 

+1

+1 Mine too. Although, I try and follow suite and always put "closed" in the title and post. Happy Friday the 13th everyone!

[comicdonna]

 

I would like to take this opportunity to go on the records that ALL of my past sales threads are CLOSED.

 

+1

+1 Mine too. Although, I try and follow suite and always put "closed" in the title and post. Happy Friday the 13th everyone!

I think one or two of mine are open. Feel free to make an offer.

[HarveySwick]

[Bio-Rupp]

Ryan, I'd agree with you IF this was an old thread and an oversight regarding closing it down.

 

That's NOT the case here though. Before jawn added the in the thread, he had been discussing the book with oceanavekid for a full day. Meaning IF the thread really was closed, why didn't he update it as such if that was his intention? The rules are clear that sellers are responsible for their threads. He didn't want it closed.

 

This isn't a long-time, respected seller. This is a guy who has constantly bent and broken the rules. He has had two or three recent sales threads pulled by the kids for simultaneously having books for sale here and listed on eBay. In one instance he had a sales thread pulled, he complained about the mods having a personal agenda against him and he had no more books listed on eBay while starting a new sales thread. Guess what - the books he listed here were STILL up for sale on eBay, this guy is either the dumbest guy to sell things or he is consciously and repeatedly breaking the rules. The sales thread being left open was not an oversight in this instance.

 

Justin... do you think this really matters in this case? I can send you an immediate link to a "long-time respected seller" who not only blatently broke the rules... but contacted a friend in moderation to allow him to bypass the rules

 

I'm not talking about board etiquette or personal opinions... I'm talking about a actual stated, written rule that was altered based on personal bias/preferential treatment to another member.

 

The only reason this is allowed to happen is mainly because someone will say "hey you shouldn't mess with them... they are a long time respected member"... plus they have lots of friends on here that will bombard you with that simple statement... leaving the person who wants to do the right thing perplexed to say the least.

 

Is it fair that a "long time respected seller" gets a pass and a n00b trying to get things right in his first three or four sales doesn't?

 

Jawn believes he is in the right. Oceanavekid believes he is. There is no answer to this one I don't believe because it's been discussed ad nauseam.

 

Perhaps the easiest way for us to try to find an answer is to PM sellers with threads that are one week and older to see if their threads are still open if they have no notation stating they are closed.

 

Any one of us can get the answer from them via PM. If they imply it's closed by stating "that thread is a week old so I would assume it's closed" and we then post in their threads for books they still have listed for sale... are they still on the hook? What if they say "I think I sold half of those" and we then go place a on one that sold already. Can we hold that seller to the sale?

 

Over the weekend, maybe we should randomly experiment... not to force a sale... but just PM some sellers with week or so old sales threads and ask them their opinion on whether or not their sales threads are closed or open

 

 

But if was closed based on being a week old, why didn't Oceanavekid tell Jawn when Jawn was trying to negotiate a price? Instead of saying the thread was closed, Oceanavekid said "I think I'll hold onto it until I get pics" and "I might hold onto it because it's priced too low."

 

The argument of the thread being closed down by default is moot. If it WAS closed, why would the seller continue to PM somebody who is trying to buy the book instead of saying the thread was closed and the books weren't for sale?

 

Good question.

 

So if oceanavekid had not politely continued answering jawn's questions and multiple PMs he would be off the hook? Is that what you are implying

 

I mean the 'kid's first response to the direct sale/newsstand questions was "I'm going to to hold on to it"... which was before any perceived negotiation was taking place.

 

I seriously think this has now officially been beaten to a slow and painful death.

 

The easiest answer is just to ask the community to vote on whether or not the 'kid needs a second chance or not.

 

If not that... then I guess we can go back to talking about new grading companies and pressing until something like this happens again

 

 

[N/A]

Give Jawn and Ocean more time before any vote. (thumbs u

[Cascaders27]

I've tried to follow along with the mess as best as possible and have reached the following resolution. I'm not sure how everyone would feel about it, but as Calvin once said "A good compromise leaves everyone mad."

 

This doesn't seem like a PL worthy offense to me and I think having ocean on the list (for this) simply weakens the list. We've established that communication could have been MUCH better on both ends, the thread should have been closed if he really wasn't interested in selling, it was a low move by jawn to try and force a sale, etc, etc, etc. I do like the idea of using this as a chance to define some auto-thread timeout rules since many sellers just abandon their threads instead of posting them as closed.

 

I think enough about the buyer and seller has been displayed here that many of us can reach our own conclusions about dealing with both/either of them going forward regardless of list status. I know that won't protect people who join the boards after the fact if ocean is removed from the PL. As the offended half jawn would need to approve this, but I don't see anything further to be gained by ocean remaining on the PL. What would need to be done for jawn to feel this was resolved? The book is already sold. An apology for the confusion might be nice but I don't see that happening given the attitudes displayed so far...

 

A third list would be incredibly helpful in cases like this, but I don't think that is realistic. Every transaction here should be approached with at least a hint of caution even though as we all know Cool Books can make people do some funky things. However, I think the system works reasonably well in it's current form, and part of that is the incredibly simplicity of it. The more public time out lists we try to maintain the more issues like this we'll run into. The PL and HOS have reasonably clearly defined rules and regulations and for the most part the community does a reasonably good job maintaining them. There will always be the occasional cod-piece like solarcadet who just doesn't give a flying $#%@ but I've tried to be responsible with my transactions here and haven't run into any real issues as a result.

 

 

 

 

 

[revat]

I would think the fact that there are so many reasonable (and unreasonable) people on BOTH sides of this argument, and/or near the middle would make one think that the PL should be reserved for something more egregious.

[CAHokie]

I took it upon myself to group PM Ocean and Jawn this morning. I offered to help mediate a solution between the two. One has responded and the other one hasnt had a chance to read it yet. Hopefully by the end of the day a resolution can be found between the two parties and the PL settled. Going forward though, I think there still needs to be a standard on when is a thread closed but I have no idea how that will happen.

[comicdonna]

I took it upon myself to group PM Ocean and Jawn this morning. I offered to help mediate a solution between the two. One has responded and the other one hasnt had a chance to read it yet. Hopefully by the end of the day a resolution can be found between the two parties and the PL settled. Going forward though, I think there still needs to be a standard on when is a thread closed but I have no idea how that will happen.

Get Arch to place a lock on all FS threads, after 1 week of no posting has passed. If you can do that, I will send you a free comic.

[CAHokie]

I took it upon myself to group PM Ocean and Jawn this morning. I offered to help mediate a solution between the two. One has responded and the other one hasnt had a chance to read it yet. Hopefully by the end of the day a resolution can be found between the two parties and the PL settled. Going forward though, I think there still needs to be a standard on when is a thread closed but I have no idea how that will happen.

Get Arch to place a lock on all FS threads, after 1 week of no posting has passed. If you can do that, I will send you a free comic.

 

 

I am good, but not that good. I think it is well known they would rather not have to moderate every thread. Guess that free X-force will have to stay with you.

[Dr. Balls]

I think there still needs to be a standard on when is a thread closed but I have no idea how that will happen.

 

I think the status of a closed thread is ultimately going to be the responsibility of the seller - with the hopes that situations like what is going on between Jawn and Ocean will be a motivator for people to keep up with their threads and make sales changes when they should happen, not only after it becomes a problem.

 

I think there has to be an element of personal responsibility on sellers - I don't think it's going to work having a rule that dictates when a sales thread is closed that supercedes a seller's desire to close it.

 

And very cool for Hokie to mediate!

[comicdonna]

I took it upon myself to group PM Ocean and Jawn this morning. I offered to help mediate a solution between the two. One has responded and the other one hasnt had a chance to read it yet. Hopefully by the end of the day a resolution can be found between the two parties and the PL settled. Going forward though, I think there still needs to be a standard on when is a thread closed but I have no idea how that will happen.

Get Arch to place a lock on all FS threads, after 1 week of no posting has passed. If you can do that, I will send you a free comic.

 

 

I am good, but not that good. I think it is well known they would rather not have to moderate every thread. Guess that free X-force will have to stay with you.

There used to be a time limit on editing your post. I think that was done away with. I think Arch could wire up an automatic lock on old threads, like he did editing posts.

[N/A]

I took it upon myself to group PM Ocean and Jawn this morning.

 

Get in line.

[CAHokie]

I took it upon myself to group PM Ocean and Jawn this morning.

 

Get in line.

 

I am going to pluck your tail feathers!