PROBATION DISCUSSIONS 21 21

[Bosco685]

[GACollectibles]

I would challenge you to show me a single instance where money changed hands in public on this forum.

 

Chicago, August, 2009. For Stuff of Legend 9.8 SS books.

[comix4fun]

I would challenge you to show me a single instance where money changed hands in public on this forum.

 

Chicago, August, 2009. For Stuff of Legend 9.8 SS books.

 

 

That was on the "convention floor" in Chicago...not on this forum.

 

and.......PROVE IT!!

[skypinkblu]

I would challenge you to show me a single instance where money changed hands in public on this forum.

 

Chicago, August, 2009. For Stuff of Legend 9.8 SS books.

 

 

That was on the "convention floor" in Chicago...not on this forum.

 

and.......PROVE IT!!

 

You just "proved it" yourself;)

[Snake Eyes]

Being that there was a paypal payment made we have evidence of a transaction that was agreed to.

 

No we don't - because we don't have evidence of that. Because it was done privately.

 

 

 

All payments are done "Privately". Being that this is the "internet" and not a "convention sales floor" everyone pays everyone "privately". I would challenge you to show me a single instance where money changed hands in public on this forum. As well, the probation list was never for just sales thread violations, it was and is for ALL transactions that take place because of communication that began on this board, whether by PM or by posted message.

 

Every transaction has several portions of it that are completed outside the all seeing eye of this forum. That doesn't mean, however, that they didn't happen.

 

Based on your criteria, there is never an instance in which a seller can place a buyer on the probation list because no one here can "prove" that they weren't paid.

 

Sure they "said" that paypal was never sent, or that a chargeback was made, or that they never got a check or money order, but since the payment was "private" they have no proof.

 

Based on where you are setting the bar it would be nearly impossible to place anyone on the probation list. No one can prove that they "didn't get paid", can they? That's never been a criteria of the probation list and being that it allows for the ones committing the infractions to get off scott free it isn't going to be added any time soon.

 

The buyer is more than welcome to come to this forum and state his case and present his side of it. If he refuses to do so, or doesn't want to he doesn't get a presumption of innocence he gets a judgment against him by default.

 

 

Agreed Chris! (thumbs u

 

In many cases, the transactions are conducted privately or solicited on the boards to be completed elsewhere (for example people soliciting sales on their websites or buyers who wish to remain anonymous except to the seller). This is all perfectly reasonable and should not abrogate the protections afforded to members of the community provided by the probation list.

 

Two examples come to mind. I sold a book privately via PM that was offered on a for sale thread here. The buyer did not identify himself in any way on the thread itself and offered full asking price via PM. He never specifically said as much, but it was pretty clear that he preferred to do business outside of the eyes of the general forum. By respecting this, do I give up my right to request probation if the transaction goes sour (or recipricolly his right to do so as well). MY understanding is absolutely not. If either of us would have failed to fulfill our obligations (even made totally in private between the two of us) that person would have been eligible for probation status. In my mind this is appropriate and helps maintain an orderly community that mixes both socializing and business.

 

The second example would be comic supply (or my understanding of the situation since it predates my presence). Apparently, he solicited sales on the forum, directing people to his site. He failed to honor numerous committments and caused quite the mess storm. He too, in my opinion, would deserve probationary status for this offense. It was certainly a point that was argued (so I am not at all saying the discussion is without merit). Nevertheless, in my opinion any of these types of offenses in my opinion are non-public in terms of the sale agreement, but would merit being placed on probation.

 

Just my long-winded two cents

 

SE

[GACollectibles]

I would challenge you to show me a single instance where money changed hands in public on this forum.

 

Chicago, August, 2009. For Stuff of Legend 9.8 SS books.

 

 

That was on the "convention floor" in Chicago...not on this forum.

 

and.......PROVE IT!!

 

I was logged in at the time so I had one foot in the forum.

[Bosco685]

[comix4fun]

I would challenge you to show me a single instance where money changed hands in public on this forum.

 

Chicago, August, 2009. For Stuff of Legend 9.8 SS books.

 

 

That was on the "convention floor" in Chicago...not on this forum.

 

and.......PROVE IT!!

 

You just "proved it" yourself;)

 

 

And I would have gotten away with it to, if it wasn't for you meddling kids.

 

 

Besides that was cash for a lap dance....from Andy....

 

ummm I mean...yep....Andy was right.

[comix4fun]

I would challenge you to show me a single instance where money changed hands in public on this forum.

 

Chicago, August, 2009. For Stuff of Legend 9.8 SS books.

 

 

That was on the "convention floor" in Chicago...not on this forum.

 

and.......PROVE IT!!

 

I was logged in at the time so I had one foot in the forum.

 

I don't want to know where you foot or your log have been.

[GACollectibles]

I would challenge you to show me a single instance where money changed hands in public on this forum.

 

Chicago, August, 2009. For Stuff of Legend 9.8 SS books.

 

 

That was on the "convention floor" in Chicago...not on this forum.

 

and.......PROVE IT!!

 

I was logged in at the time so I had one foot in the forum.

 

I don't want to know where you foot or your log have been.

 

Damn, you have a short or selective memory. They were in your lap. Hence the name of the dance.

[Dano]

I agree that ultimately ALL transactions on this board are done privately. In fact, my largest cash transaction here was done completely behind the scenes via pm.

 

Dan

[jpolz]

Being that there was a paypal payment made we have evidence of a transaction that was agreed to.

 

No we don't - because we don't have evidence of that. Because it was done privately.

 

 

All payments are done "Privately".

 

I realize that. You, however pointed to it as "proof" a transaction occurred. My point is that something that happens only in private between two people isn't proof to anyone else.

[skypinkblu]

Being that there was a paypal payment made we have evidence of a transaction that was agreed to.

 

No we don't - because we don't have evidence of that. Because it was done privately.

 

 

All payments are done "Privately".

 

I realize that. You, however pointed to it as "proof" a transaction occurred. My point is that something that happens only in private between two people isn't proof to anyone else.

 

I suppose that is why we have these threads, so that the other person can speak their piece, or peace, or...well, you get the picture;)

 

It's not perfect, but the probation list serves as a warning.

 

My question is, let's say the person really was nervous about the fact that the books were not "in hand". Would he be let off the hook if he admitted that? I know he said he wanted to move forward, but are second thoughts a terrible thing in this case?

[jpolz]

So if someone posts the little guy and then pulls out of the deal via PM, you wouldn't believe it as it was done privately? You want to see public flakes for it to be list-worthy?

 

I don't know what "posts the little guy" means. Do you mean if someone posts publicly that they want to buy, and then pulls out via PM?

 

 

[jpolz]

Based on your criteria, there is never an instance in which a seller can place a buyer on the probation list because no one here can "prove" that they weren't paid.

 

That's not what I said. I said "My concern is that the transaction occurred entirely via Private Message."

 

Not that one part was private, or even that an important detail was. The only evidence we have that there even WAS a transaction for which to Probie this guy is that we think branget is a stand-up guy and that the dude with 2 posts to his name will somehow find out he's on the probation list and make his case.

 

The buyer is more than welcome to come to this forum and state his case and present his side of it. If he refuses to do so, or doesn't want to he doesn't get a presumption of innocence he gets a judgment against him by default.

 

He's already been judged. He's on the probation list.

 

 

[jpolz]

I suppose that is why we have these threads, so that the other person can speak their piece, or peace, or...well, you get the picture;)

 

It's not perfect, but the probation list serves as a warning.

 

My question is, let's say the person really was nervous about the fact that the books were not "in hand". Would he be let off the hook if he admitted that? I know he said he wanted to move forward, but are second thoughts a terrible thing in this case?

 

That'd be up to the seller who put him on the list.

 

My problem with this, really, is the big opportunity I see for abuse. I think group policing works great when there's a lot of transparency. The thing is, message boards like this tend to be somewhat insular & protective of their own. People are going to believe a person they know over someone they don't; they're going to believe someone with a high post count over a low post count. That's natural and not necessarily bad -- but if you don't have at least a little transparency then it invites abuse too.

 

Look what we've got here: A sale that the only evidence of is from 1 person.

The other party added to the board's "not safe to do business with" list.

The only person who can remove him from that list? The person who put him there.

 

That's a fine system if we're all completely honest -- but eventually we're gonna get bit in the by someone who's had a run of bad luck or just isn't quite as honest as we thought they were.

 

Anyway, I've certainly had my say on this so I'll stop. The rest of the board is okay with this so there it is. I just thought I'd explain my position.

 

 

 

 

[Count]

I think you'd be surprised as to how many "private" transactions occur here on the board for many different reasons. Just because it was private doesn't mean someone shouldn't be put on a probation list.

 

It's really simple, the buyer or the seller is put on the list if they messed up. If they want to dispute it then can come here and do so...I really don't see a problem with that.

 

If someone REALLY needs proof well I'm sure that can be arranged by letting an unbiased party login into their accounts to verify specifics. I don't believe this was ever needed tho :shrug:

[DiceX]

I suppose that is why we have these threads, so that the other person can speak their piece, or peace, or...well, you get the picture;)

 

It's not perfect, but the probation list serves as a warning.

 

My question is, let's say the person really was nervous about the fact that the books were not "in hand". Would he be let off the hook if he admitted that? I know he said he wanted to move forward, but are second thoughts a terrible thing in this case?

 

That'd be up to the seller who put him on the list.

 

My problem with this, really, is the big opportunity I see for abuse. I think group policing works great when there's a lot of transparency. The thing is, message boards like this tend to be somewhat insular & protective of their own. People are going to believe a person they know over someone they don't; they're going to believe someone with a high post count over a low post count. That's natural and not necessarily bad -- but if you don't have at least a little transparency then it invites abuse too.

 

Look what we've got here: A sale that the only evidence of is from 1 person.

The other party added to the board's "not safe to do business with" list.

The only person who can remove him from that list? The person who put him there.

 

That's a fine system if we're all completely honest -- but eventually we're gonna get bit in the by someone who's had a run of bad luck or just isn't quite as honest as we thought they were.

 

Anyway, I've certainly had my say on this so I'll stop. The rest of the board is okay with this so there it is. I just thought I'd explain my position.

 

 

 

 

Is it perfect? No, nothing will be.

Mistakes are going to happen, and often do, then get worked out in this thread after both sides have aired their stories. The cream rises and the turds sink to the bottom. Sometimes you get a floater and it takes a while, but eventually it will lose it's buoyancy after a little time.

 

Here's the thing...CGC is not going to waste the time and resources policing sales on a message board, so either we police it, or we buy and sell on eBay.

 

So shut your hole.

 

 

[Bosco685]

So if someone posts the little guy and then pulls out of the deal via PM, you wouldn't believe it as it was done privately? You want to see public flakes for it to be list-worthy?

I don't know what "posts the little guy" means. Do you mean if someone posts publicly that they want to buy, and then pulls out via PM?

It's a new board come-on. I never knew Boozad was looking.

 

[mschmidt]

So ... have the rules for adding people to the probation list been changed now?

 

Because when I wanted to add jhurley to the list for flaking on a purchase I was repeatedly told that I had to wait 30 days - and yet branget just got someone added to the list within a day :shrug: