PROBATION DISCUSSIONS 21 21

[IchigosSoul]

The shilling was not proven, not admitted to. One thing that rubs my rhubarb is when people say "I am fairly positive" or similar (like "I think" or "I am pretty sure" etc.

 

The shilling was proven TWICE. The second time he was in this thread when he was caught and actively ended his shilled listings as the forum was discussing them!

 

The first time he was caught shilling he blamed it on other people out to sabotage him as a result of badmouthing a local comic shop on the internet. He used his admitted secondary eBay to shill his hustruck007 listings. Whenever possible he scrubs all of his threads and posts that could be used to incriminate himself so asking for evidence of something that he posted about months ago is unrealistic.

 

This kid is a turd. He does not need to be defended. He is not a good person. He is fully aware of what is going on in this thread at the moment and has chosen to remain silent on purpose.

 

He was fast-tracked to the HoS because he is a repeat offender whose name pops up in this thread every few months. He has shown zero indication of ever actually putting an end to his inappropriate behavior even though he has been warned by numerous board members repeatedly.

 

Has he done anything particularly nasty that warrants his inclusion on the same list as other board members who have scammed people out of thousands of dollars? No. But this is a preemptive measure to avoid that from occurring later on and it is also justified because of his habitual violations thus far.

 

One who shills his own listings on separate occasions, gets caught each time, and then refuses to admit and/or apologize for having done it is not someone the forum needs to keep around. Someone who does this and then proceeds to attempt to drop-ship an expensive book, only to fail and attempt to get out of his obligation through a sequence of lies and deception is especially not someone that the forum needs to keep around.

 

He started out here trying to corral people to yelp or something similar to make false bad reviews. Doesn't that count as interfering with someone's business?

[Ryan.]

Does it even really matter what list HusTruck gets added to? Does anyone even look at those lists when buying or selling?

[seanfingh]

Does it even really matter what list HusTruck gets added to? Does anyone even look at those lists when buying or selling?

 

Some people do and some don't. Most of the n00bs who come in and act crazy, I put on ignore. Otherwise I will forget. Right after the 2012 image speculation pop, the number burgeoned . . .

[EC ed]

So, aside from the specific HusTruck situation, I'm attempting to push the more meta-discussion about what these lists represent, and how one should be added. Here was my first take at offering a thought alternative.

 

Probation List: a tool for an individual boardie to use to enforce a specific transaction...keep the membership and removal criteria and process exactly the same as they are now. If a boardie has been jerked around on a transaction, they should have the PL mechanism as a remedy...doesn't matter whether the book is $10 or $100. If the aggrieved boardie wants to enforce the transaction, so be it - that is the purpose of the PL. Our interpretation of what it means to be on the PL is then straightforward - a PL member is a member that has failed to fulfill his/her commitment under an agreed upon transaction. Period.

 

Hall of Shame: a tool for the community at large...not an individual...but the community at large, to declare that a boardie's behavior has been shameful and deserving of community-imposed censure. Doesn't have to be a super-villian...just deserving of community-imposed censure. Procedure is the same as now - vote them on, and vote them off if they seem rehabilitated. That's what it means to be on the HoS. Period.

 

Although not rational, I suppose I see the concern that this HoS mechanism raises concern about people getting voted on for less than objective reasons.

 

So, let me alter those definitions to propose another thought alternative towards the other end of the spectrum:

 

Probation List: a tool for an individual boardie to use to enforce a specific transaction...keep the membership and removal criteria and process exactly the same as they are now. If a boardie has been jerked around on a transaction, they should have the PL mechanism as a remedy...doesn't matter whether the book is $10 or $100. If the aggrieved boardie wants to enforce the transaction, so be it - that is the purpose of the PL. Our interpretation of what it means to be on the PL is then straightforward - a PL member is a member that has failed to fulfill his/her commitment under an agreed upon transaction. Period.

 

Hall of Shame: You are added to the HoS by operation of rule when you are placed on the Probation List a third time. There is no community vote to put you on the HoS. Once you have your third PL appearance, you are on the HoS, period. After a mandatory 6-month waiting period, you may petition for removal from the HoS, which will be put to a community vote, majority rules. That's what HoS means, period.

 

How's that? This way, there is basically no subjectivity whatsoever in putting someone on the HoS. In fact, there is not vote needed or allowed for putting someone there. They are there automatically if they have had 3 PL appearances. After that, if they get voted off the HoS, any subsequent PL additions (i.e., their 4th) gets them straight back on the HoS, with another 6 month minimum. Under this approach, nothing outside the forum marketplace matters for putting someone on the HoS. That's probably as it should be, anyway. They can lie, cheat, steal from anyone out in society...but if it didn't relate to something that happened in a transaction with a boardie that got them on the PL 3 times, it doesn't matter. No vote needed. No subjectivity. No super-villian status required. It's definitional...3 PL strikes puts you on the HoS...no other way to get there.

 

How's that?

[rodan57]

Does it even really matter what list HusTruck gets added to? Does anyone even look at those lists when buying or selling?

 

It's just another aspect of due diligence (e.g., understanding grading, researching recent sales, weighing the effects of market hype, buying for long or short term, etc...).

 

Not every one feels the necessity or desire to fully research a purchase.

[A.Romeo]

" How do you know with such assurance what their logic is if they never voiced it?" Because they just voiced it in that poll. Good grief.

 

So logic can be voiced in a poll? I retract my lawyer comment. I think you are a psychic. You seem to know the minds of 100+ people, that majority of which have not uttered a peep beyond the poll.

 

So if something is put to a vote should each person who voted have to write a paragraph on why they voted Yes or No? Would that make it more real?

[skypinkblu]

Maybe not you but certainly everyone else believea that Hustrucks offenses aren't substantial to warrant HOS

 

 

Povertyrov

Hado

bragnet

skypinkblu

Crassus

columbiacomics

Jimmylinguini

 

They all felt HusTruck should not be added based on the Hulk 181 incident because not enough proof was presented

 

Let's see the PMs get presented and we can revisit at that time.

 

I'm only questioning why one nomination had push back and why the other one didn't

Is this an official 'List'?

 

 

Now Now there are 13 more out of 150 votes that believe that he does not warrant HOS. We must be fair.

Is it possible that some may not want to advocate for PL or HOS when their own selling or lazy shipping practices run afoul of what they are advocating for? :shrug:

 

I guess I missed all the fun. All I can say in response to this is...

 

Wow, for the record, I don't think anyone has ever called me lazy, and I think I've got a decent reputation as far as my selling or practices go. At least I hope so.

 

 

 

I certainly did not ask nor did I expect the poll to be deleted, I merely voiced my opinion after I thought a decision had ALREADY BEEN MADE...and

 

after Metal PSI said something about Hustruck having 15 shills.

 

I think the board voiced an opinion. My only problem was/is that I think we need to take more time before posting these polls/votes in the future. To me at least, the board made a decision. He should be added, if someone wants him off the list, there needs to be another poll.

 

 

 

I think that Harvey tries extremely hard to help here and I think his time is valuable. He said he felt he needed to post what he did quickly,that's a lot of pressure for someone who is a volunteer..

 

I'd just like to clarify that we don't need to rush these things. Would someone really be in danger if we had waited an extra day or two to gather ALL the facts before rushing these polls?

 

I would also hope we would remember to mask all the replies ...so some people are not influenced by other's votes.

 

That's SOME people, the people who posted things about not bothering to read ...certainly not everyone.

 

My vote is worth no more than the next person's, new or not. As long as they took the time to read everything and make an informed decision.

 

 

 

I'm sure that Hustruck is not blameless, he's proven that he's got issues and I'm not talking about comics, but I thought that 4comix made some very unusual statements in the SALES thread and then on here, so I wanted to see the PMs.

 

My objective is merely to be fair, whether I'd want to invite either party over to dinner or not. Just look at the facts and not get emotional about it.

 

 

 

 

 

[jsilverjanet]

I think Awake meant the other 13 people who voted no and were not being vocal etc.

 

I don't think he meant anyone on the 'list' per se

[skypinkblu]

So, aside from the specific HusTruck situation, I'm attempting to push the more meta-discussion about what these lists represent, and how one should be added. Here was my first take at offering a thought alternative.

 

Probation List: a tool for an individual boardie to use to enforce a specific transaction...keep the membership and removal criteria and process exactly the same as they are now. If a boardie has been jerked around on a transaction, they should have the PL mechanism as a remedy...doesn't matter whether the book is $10 or $100. If the aggrieved boardie wants to enforce the transaction, so be it - that is the purpose of the PL. Our interpretation of what it means to be on the PL is then straightforward - a PL member is a member that has failed to fulfill his/her commitment under an agreed upon transaction. Period.

 

Hall of Shame: a tool for the community at large...not an individual...but the community at large, to declare that a boardie's behavior has been shameful and deserving of community-imposed censure. Doesn't have to be a super-villian...just deserving of community-imposed censure. Procedure is the same as now - vote them on, and vote them off if they seem rehabilitated. That's what it means to be on the HoS. Period.

 

Although not rational, I suppose I see the concern that this HoS mechanism raises concern about people getting voted on for less than objective reasons.

 

So, let me alter those definitions to propose another thought alternative towards the other end of the spectrum:

 

Probation List: a tool for an individual boardie to use to enforce a specific transaction...keep the membership and removal criteria and process exactly the same as they are now. If a boardie has been jerked around on a transaction, they should have the PL mechanism as a remedy...doesn't matter whether the book is $10 or $100. If the aggrieved boardie wants to enforce the transaction, so be it - that is the purpose of the PL. Our interpretation of what it means to be on the PL is then straightforward - a PL member is a member that has failed to fulfill his/her commitment under an agreed upon transaction. Period.

 

Hall of Shame: You are added to the HoS by operation of rule when you are placed on the Probation List a third time. There is no community vote to put you on the HoS. Once you have your third PL appearance, you are on the HoS, period. After a mandatory 6-month waiting period, you may petition for removal from the HoS, which will be put to a community vote, majority rules. That's what HoS means, period.

 

How's that? This way, there is basically no subjectivity whatsoever in putting someone on the HoS. In fact, there is not vote needed or allowed for putting someone there. They are there automatically if they have had 3 PL appearances. After that, if they get voted off the HoS, any subsequent PL additions (i.e., their 4th) gets them straight back on the HoS, with another 6 month minimum. Under this approach, nothing outside the forum marketplace matters for putting someone on the HoS. That's probably as it should be, anyway. They can lie, cheat, steal from anyone out in society...but if it didn't relate to something that happened in a transaction with a boardie that got them on the PL 3 times, it doesn't matter. No vote needed. No subjectivity. No super-villian status required. It's definitional...3 PL strikes puts you on the HoS...no other way to get there.

 

How's that?

 

I think it's an interesting start, Ed, but Pov would have more insight. He did an awful lot of work the last time there were rules written and I'd like to see a thread in CG, rather than here so more people than just the ones who frequent this thread can get involved.

[skypinkblu]

I think Awake meant the other 13 people who voted no and were not being vocal etc.

 

I don't think he meant anyone on the 'list' per se

 

It's not a lot of fun to sign on and see your name on a "list" and those comments.

 

Why do a list, Hector? What was the point?

[Sqeggs]

I really believe the PL is often used as a tool to manipulate bad transactions into completed transactions. Are we really condoning a seller who insists a buyer pays $500 for a $50 book? This turns my stomach and I could never, in good faith, "force" a buyer to complete such a transaction.

 

Has this ever happened? Serious question.

[Sqeggs]

So, aside from the specific HusTruck situation, I'm attempting to push the more meta-discussion about what these lists represent, and how one should be added. Here was my first take at offering a thought alternative.

 

Probation List: a tool for an individual boardie to use to enforce a specific transaction...keep the membership and removal criteria and process exactly the same as they are now. If a boardie has been jerked around on a transaction, they should have the PL mechanism as a remedy...doesn't matter whether the book is $10 or $100. If the aggrieved boardie wants to enforce the transaction, so be it - that is the purpose of the PL. Our interpretation of what it means to be on the PL is then straightforward - a PL member is a member that has failed to fulfill his/her commitment under an agreed upon transaction. Period.

 

Hall of Shame: a tool for the community at large...not an individual...but the community at large, to declare that a boardie's behavior has been shameful and deserving of community-imposed censure. Doesn't have to be a super-villian...just deserving of community-imposed censure. Procedure is the same as now - vote them on, and vote them off if they seem rehabilitated. That's what it means to be on the HoS. Period.

 

Although not rational, I suppose I see the concern that this HoS mechanism raises concern about people getting voted on for less than objective reasons.

 

So, let me alter those definitions to propose another thought alternative towards the other end of the spectrum:

 

Probation List: a tool for an individual boardie to use to enforce a specific transaction...keep the membership and removal criteria and process exactly the same as they are now. If a boardie has been jerked around on a transaction, they should have the PL mechanism as a remedy...doesn't matter whether the book is $10 or $100. If the aggrieved boardie wants to enforce the transaction, so be it - that is the purpose of the PL. Our interpretation of what it means to be on the PL is then straightforward - a PL member is a member that has failed to fulfill his/her commitment under an agreed upon transaction. Period.

 

Hall of Shame: You are added to the HoS by operation of rule when you are placed on the Probation List a third time. There is no community vote to put you on the HoS. Once you have your third PL appearance, you are on the HoS, period. After a mandatory 6-month waiting period, you may petition for removal from the HoS, which will be put to a community vote, majority rules. That's what HoS means, period.

 

How's that? This way, there is basically no subjectivity whatsoever in putting someone on the HoS. In fact, there is not vote needed or allowed for putting someone there. They are there automatically if they have had 3 PL appearances. After that, if they get voted off the HoS, any subsequent PL additions (i.e., their 4th) gets them straight back on the HoS, with another 6 month minimum. Under this approach, nothing outside the forum marketplace matters for putting someone on the HoS. That's probably as it should be, anyway. They can lie, cheat, steal from anyone out in society...but if it didn't relate to something that happened in a transaction with a boardie that got them on the PL 3 times, it doesn't matter. No vote needed. No subjectivity. No super-villian status required. It's definitional...3 PL strikes puts you on the HoS...no other way to get there.

 

How's that?

 

I've skipped maybe 40 pages of discussion, so I'm probably missing something, but you seem to be ruling out the possibility of someone being voted directly into the HoS after a particularly egregious violation even if the person had not previously been on the PL.

 

Do we want to do that?

[jsilverjanet]

I think Awake meant the other 13 people who voted no and were not being vocal etc.

 

I don't think he meant anyone on the 'list' per se

 

It's not a lot of fun to sign on and see your name on a "list" and those comments.

 

Why do a list, Hector? What was the point?

 

I'm not sure why people had such an issue with me writing that list. I wanted to keep track of those who voiced concern (on how the initial nomination was put together) that when it came time to renominate Hustruck I'd confirm that we had the write done correctly.

 

If I would have know people would have taken such an issue with the list, I would have never wrote it.

 

This thread is so much damn if you do damn if you don't

 

The backlash of all of this is that it makes people less likely to participate whether nominating anyone or speaking out about anything because it's met with immediate push back.

 

I can see why Harvey not wanting to participate any further and I'm just as close. And I like you a lot Sharon. But the rest

[Sqeggs]

Wow, for the record, I don't think anyone has ever called me lazy, and I think I've got a decent reputation as far as my selling or practices go. At least I hope so.

 

Oh, yeah? You shipped me a book once and my address was written in purple ink! No wonder you're a softy on the PL!

[jsilverjanet]

I would like the veterans to answer 3 questions that came up

 

1 - is the terms to be removed from the PL limited to only what the nominee and nominated party agree to.

 

2 - Should Redrocks have been placed in the HOS based on A) lack of write up, B) offense commited

 

3) If yes, why is that different than the HusTruck nomination

[Hado]

I think Awake meant the other 13 people who voted no and were not being vocal etc.

 

I don't think he meant anyone on the 'list' per se

 

It's not a lot of fun to sign on and see your name on a "list" and those comments.

 

Why do a list, Hector? What was the point?

This concerns me as well.

[skypinkblu]

Wow, for the record, I don't think anyone has ever called me lazy, and I think I've got a decent reputation as far as my selling or practices go. At least I hope so.

 

Oh, yeah? You shipped me a book once and my address was written in purple ink! No wonder you're a softy on the PL!

 

Purple bubble wrap, I print the labels;) :

 

It's not a matter of being a softy, it's just a matter of not rushing and getting emotional about it.

 

I'm not worried about someone getting shot while posting on the boards, if that were the case, I'd take a different view entirely.

[jsilverjanet]

Thank god and al gore for the internet

 

 

[wombat]

I thought as long as the person that nominated someone for the PL asked for them to be taken off they would be. Is that not the case?

[skypinkblu]

I think Awake meant the other 13 people who voted no and were not being vocal etc.

 

I don't think he meant anyone on the 'list' per se

 

It's not a lot of fun to sign on and see your name on a "list" and those comments.

 

Why do a list, Hector? What was the point?

 

I'm not sure why people had such an issue with me writing that list. I wanted to keep track of those who voiced concern (on how the initial nomination was put together) that when it came time to renominate Hustruck I'd confirm that we had the write done correctly.

 

If I would have know people would have taken such an issue with the list, I would have never wrote it.

 

This thread is so much damn if you do damn if you don't

 

The backlash of all of this is that it makes people less likely to participate whether nominating anyone or speaking out about anything because it's met with immediate push back.

 

I can see why Harvey not wanting to participate any further and I'm just as close. And I like you a lot Sharon. But the rest

 

I like you and Harvey (Justin) a lot, I think you both add a lot to the forums. That's not the point.

 

All I know is I made some comments, went off to do something else, signed on this morning and the poll has been canceled, and I'm on some list which someone I don't know has quoted and has made less than complimentary comments...

 

So my thought was that people who don't know me are going to remember me for being one of the bad people on a list, .

 

There is TOO MUCH rushing going on here. Too much rushing to write a poll, to have a poll, and then to take down the poll.

 

When I saw the poll had been taken down, my first thought was that 100+ people are going to be insulted now.

 

25 probably won't care and 25 were drinking so they won't remember;)

 

but you get my drift;)

 

These things need to be done slowly, so that emotions don't make the decisions for us.