PROBATION DISCUSSIONS 21 21

[Boozad]

Did Quality Comix actually take money from anybody? I understand that the PL is for people who fail to complete a transaction in 30 days, but considering he didn't actually take any payments I don't see that what he did was actually that bad. I'm not saying he didn't deserve to be nominated to the PL and his procrastination was silly to say the least, and I daresay he hasn't done his reputation any favours in the process.

It should be no different than posting an ill take it and not paying.

 

If throw up and never pay, i havnt taking anything that isnt mine so by your logic is just all good.

 

3rd party opinions should have no influence whatsoever. It is up to the wronged parties and only the wronged parties to decide the fate of the person on the list IMO

 

I know that if i put someone on the list and im not ready for them to come off, i would be being a hell of a lot less polite than the two people in this instance. There wouldnt be much of a discussion about it.

 

I said in the next sentence he deserved to be on the list, I didn't say anywhere it's 'all good'. And in my second paragraph (which you conveniently cut from the quote ) I said I couldn't see what else he could do other than offer the books for free to make things right, even though it took him an age to do so. I was just agreeing with the point that probation is not probation if you're stuck there forever and the offended parties never agree to remove you.

I also said the excuse he offered was lame, and I don't expect my opinion to matter one jot as to whether he comes off or not. It's bugger all to do with me.

 

Just expressing my opinion on how the list works is all. That's my logic.

[Sqeggs]

"I have read all the post in reference to Brent. If he has made ammends he should be taken off the list.

 

I believe in keeping the buying and selling honest and certain measures need to be in place for that to happen. At times, some people tend to take these guidelines a little too far. Given enough time, the bad seeds always rise to the ocassion and find themselves on the HOS."

 

Been nice to have acknowledged that you misread my initial post, but whatever.

 

If by "At times, some people tend to take these guidelines a little too far." you mean that buyers are sometimes too quick to nominate sellers for the PL, you may be right. I have no way of knowing.

 

I will make one last observation, though, before leaving this discussion for those directly involved to work out. Sellers have an interest, I would think, in making buyers feel comfortable on the boards. I've probably bought a couple of hundred books on the boards over the past few years. I've appreciated the opportunity to pick up books for my collection. I will say, though, that I have encountered some problems with books being poorly packed, unnoticed restoration, long delays in shipping, and other "eBay-style" stuff. I'm still buying here, but I'm not too many incidents away from switching exclusively to HA and major dealers.

 

Because there is no easily accessible feedback on the boards, I would think that sellers would want to be pretty tough on each other through the PL/HoS mechanism to keep buyers from drifting away.

 

My

[qualitycomix]

In a PM exchange, I was advised I was coming across as arrogant and not remorseful. That has been reiterated in this thread by some as well. My response in the PM exchange was this: I hope it sheds more light on how I feel about this whole thing:

 

" I guess it does come across the wrong way. I did have communication problems in the past. At least twice. They were not related to board sales in any way and that is what I was writing. Maybe I should clarify that further?

 

I did write I was having family issues in a previous communication problem. I just don't want to come across as making excuses. There is no excuse. I am taking a lot of heat for this. In addition, I'm out $1,000 in sales for the free books I've shipped. Not to mention the many boardies I've directly alienated and the newer boardies who don't know me at all and might now be hesitant to deal with me.

 

I have a lot of regret for what I didn't do. Namely let boardies know there was a problem and deal with it when it was a small problem. Now it's a big deal and my business is being dragged through the mud.

 

And maybe I need to come across as more apologetic? If you knew the way I feel about this or anyone spoke to me in person you would hear and see I am very sincere and humble and regretful about this whole thing. It's a fine line to defend your reputation in some small way and at the same time sincerely apologize for the situation that I caused by not sending out invoices."

[Speedy-D]

As someone who buys on the boards pretty frequently, I have a strong desire to keep out sellers who don't play by the rules. Apparently, this seller has failed to play by the rules on multiple occasions -- at least if I'm understanding the incidents in Sharon's links correctly. But I agree with Speedy that the PL is not the HoS. So, unless someone wants to initiate the process of putting him in the HoS, I think he should come off the PL.

 

One thing that seems pretty clear, though, is that this seller is down to his last strike. If another incident occurs, I don't see how he will be able to stay out of the HoS. Given that he sells in other venues under the same name, I would think that the threat of being inducted into the HoS would be a pretty strong deterrent to engaging in similar behavior in the future. But, who knows?

 

So you are planning on keeping him on the list in the event he does something else in the future?

 

As someone who also does a lot of buying and selling on these boards I do not agree with your statement. If Quality Comics has made everyone whole I see no reason to leave him on the list. Determining if that has happened with everyone involved seems to be the question.

 

Sqeggs said pretty clearly that Brent should come off the list.

[joeypost]

As someone who buys on the boards pretty frequently, I have a strong desire to keep out sellers who don't play by the rules. Apparently, this seller has failed to play by the rules on multiple occasions -- at least if I'm understanding the incidents in Sharon's links correctly. But I agree with Speedy that the PL is not the HoS. So, unless someone wants to initiate the process of putting him in the HoS, I think he should come off the PL.

 

One thing that seems pretty clear, though, is that this seller is down to his last strike. If another incident occurs, I don't see how he will be able to stay out of the HoS. Given that he sells in other venues under the same name, I would think that the threat of being inducted into the HoS would be a pretty strong deterrent to engaging in similar behavior in the future. But, who knows?

 

So you are planning on keeping him on the list in the event he does something else in the future?

 

As someone who also does a lot of buying and selling on these boards I do not agree with your statement. If Quality Comics has made everyone whole I see no reason to leave him on the list. Determining if that has happened with everyone involved seems to be the question.

 

Sqeggs said pretty clearly that Brent should come off the list.

I read that. I also read the rest of his post and commented on that.

[comix4fun]

I am not a cold hearted person. But I saw no remorse or reasonable explanation for the lack of communication. There is a history of this kind of behavior, where does it end? Should an example be made that this type of repeated behavior should not be tolerated? I think so. He might be the nicest guy in the world, but that doesn't mean he's a good businessman.

 

How much remorse is necessary? How repentant must the offender be? Where should the power of the aggrieved party end? If a reasonable attempt to make amends is made, what more can be asked of that person? Obviously the offending party f-ed up. Unless it is HOS time, there has to be a way to get off the PL. It is not fair to say, "I don't want your restitution, you must continue to wear the Scarlet Letter."

 

[Ditch Fahrenheit]

Here are the rules for removal from the Probation List.

 

4) Removal From The PL

 

a) If the accuser requests the accused be removed form the PL, the accused will be removed.

 

b) If the accused makes full restitution to the satisfaction of the accuser, the accused will be removed from the PL.

 

c) If multiple accusers are involved, and full restitution is satisfactorily made to all accusers, the accused will be removed from the PL.

 

It seems to me that these rules are insufficient and need to be modified.

 

1) 100% of the power to remove the accused from the PL lies with the accuser(s). If the accuser chooses not to request removal, the accused stays on the list. That is the rule? This makes no sense to me. There should be a method for the accused to get off the list if an honest attempt to rectify the situation is made.

 

2) What does "satisfaction" mean? This is too nebulous. Someone might receive restitution, but still not be satisfied for various reasons.

 

3) Why is there no time limit for automatically being nominated to the HOS? Issues should be resolved quickly. Waiting months or even longer seems to defeat the purpose of a PL.

 

So, I guess my point is, why not modify the rules to reflect reality, rather than constantly having to discuss what should and should not be done because the rules are insufficient and unclear?

[skypinkblu]

Brent did send me the list. There were 20 boarders involved. So far 8 have received their books,

5 declined and 7 have not responded.

 

The invoices were just sent last Friday.

 

Why don't we take some time to get more information on the other members...the ones who have not answered.?

 

It's only been a week.

[joeypost]

Sounds like progress Sharon. I do agree the rules need to be clarified. In Brents case what is to stop someone from being a total tool despite his best efforts?

[skypinkblu]

Sounds like progress Sharon. I do agree the rules need to be clarified. In Brents case what is to stop someone from being a total tool despite his best efforts?

 

My guess is, we could have a vote...but right now, I don't think we have enough information.

 

[joeypost]

Sounds like progress Sharon. I do agree the rules need to be clarified. In Brents case what is to stop someone from being a total tool despite his best efforts?

 

My guess is, we could have a vote...but right now, I don't think we have enough information.

 

I think we have to look even beyond Brents case. There are some who carry a grudge forever, despite the best efforts of others. I don't see enough checks and balances in the system right now to prevent grudges.

[skypinkblu]

Sounds like progress Sharon. I do agree the rules need to be clarified. In Brents case what is to stop someone from being a total tool despite his best efforts?

 

My guess is, we could have a vote...but right now, I don't think we have enough information.

 

I think we have to look even beyond Brents case. There are some who carry a grudge forever, despite the best efforts of others. I don't see enough checks and balances in the system right now to prevent grudges.

 

There were 20 people involved here, Joe...not one or 2. a large percentage have not even responded yet. I know Brent wants to be "pro active" but the invoices were just sent out a week ago, after 6 months, and even he agrees we can give it more time.

 

Pirate is not the only one who can hold a grudge...what if 6 people are holding grudges?

 

As far as the way the rules work...they have worked remarkably well...until it's someone with a lot of friends...not that there is anything wrong with friends...but do you really want to make it a popularity contest?

[NP_Gresham]

In Brents case what is to stop someone from being a total tool despite his best efforts?

 

 

So how does a victim of this multiple offender suddenly become a 'tool' ?

What is "best effort'? Seems like 6 months of total denial is stretching it on 'best effort'

 

 

[Nick Paulus]

Has anyone heard from Megacon?

 

He has been a no call no show for a Walking Dead book that I bought on the boards and paid for over 2 weeks ago. All emails are going un-answered.

 

Not sure if this is the right place to ask this question. Point me to the right thread if it is not.

Thanks

Nick

[bababooey]

Has anyone heard from Megacon?

 

He has been a no call no show for a Walking Dead book that I bought on the boards and paid for over 2 weeks ago. All emails are going un-answered.

 

Not sure if this is the right place to ask this question. Point me to the right thread if it is not.

Thanks

Nick

Not sure if you're aware or not but Megacon is/was an alias for a banned PL member.

Check the PL list update for Oct 19th - Megacon = comicseekers = primeinvestibles

 

He/she/it hasn't returned to remove themselves from the PL list yet.

 

 

[joeypost]

Sounds like progress Sharon. I do agree the rules need to be clarified. In Brents case what is to stop someone from being a total tool despite his best efforts?

 

My guess is, we could have a vote...but right now, I don't think we have enough information.

 

I think we have to look even beyond Brents case. There are some who carry a grudge forever, despite the best efforts of others. I don't see enough checks and balances in the system right now to prevent grudges.

 

There were 20 people involved here, Joe...not one or 2. a large percentage have not even responded yet. I know Brent wants to be "pro active" but the invoices were just sent out a week ago, after 6 months, and even he agrees we can give it more time.

 

Pirate is not the only one who can hold a grudge...what if 6 people are holding grudges?

 

As far as the way the rules work...they have worked remarkably well...until it's someone with a lot of friends...not that there is anything wrong with friends...but do you really want to make it a popularity contest?

 

I have nothing invested here Sha, nothing. I see a flaw in the system that despite someone who makes a mistake can be hammered for it. Lets take Brents case and put it aside. Let's use anyone else who happens to mess up with 3-4 transactions. If they after some time decide to make things right and one "burned" forum member decides to teach them a lesson... what then? I agree time needs to pass in Brents case.

 

Like I said in an earlier reply in this thread, what happens with future transactions gone bad? I can see someone getting blacklisted unnecessarily. Especially someone who has a history of "not playing well with other children".

[Nick Paulus]

So I guess I out of luck? What are my options? Does anyone know if Paypal can get my money?

 

 

[joeypost]

In Brents case what is to stop someone from being a total tool despite his best efforts?

 

 

So how does a victim of this multiple offender suddenly become a 'tool' ?

What is "best effort'? Seems like 6 months of total denial is stretching it on 'best effort'

 

 

Maybe using Brents case was not the right way to make my point.

 

They become a tool when they decide to teach someone a lesson. What if it is someone else in the future and the wronged forum member feels they don't want the book or restitution regardless of the sellers efforts? What then? In this small of a community people pay for their mistakes. With that said, there is a point that the wronged party can take it too far. You have been here two years, you have never seen that happen?

[PovertyRow]

Here are the rules for removal from the Probation List.

 

4) Removal From The PL

 

a) If the accuser requests the accused be removed form the PL, the accused will be removed.

 

b) If the accused makes full restitution to the satisfaction of the accuser, the accused will be removed from the PL.

 

c) If multiple accusers are involved, and full restitution is satisfactorily made to all accusers, the accused will be removed from the PL.

 

It seems to me that these rules are insufficient and need to be modified.

 

1) 100% of the power to remove the accused from the PL lies with the accuser(s). If the accuser chooses not to request removal, the accused stays on the list. That is the rule? This makes no sense to me. There should be a method for the accused to get off the list if an honest attempt to rectify the situation is made.

 

2) What does "satisfaction" mean? This is too nebulous. Someone might receive restitution, but still not be satisfied for various reasons.

 

3) Why is there no time limit for automatically being nominated to the HOS? Issues should be resolved quickly. Waiting months or even longer seems to defeat the purpose of a PL.

 

So, I guess my point is, why not modify the rules to reflect reality, rather than constantly having to discuss what should and should not be done because the rules are insufficient and unclear?

 

Again, I agree with this 100%. As I had mentioned earlier when I was trying to phrase the collected opinions on the PL Rules I was not expecting that boardies would take another boardie hostage after they tried to make amends.

[seanfingh]

In Brents case what is to stop someone from being a total tool despite his best efforts?

 

 

So how does a victim of this multiple offender suddenly become a 'tool' ?

What is "best effort'? Seems like 6 months of total denial is stretching it on 'best effort'

 

 

Maybe using Brents case was not the right way to make my point.

 

They become a tool when they decide to teach someone a lesson. What if it is someone else in the future and the wronged forum member feels they don't want the book or restitution regardless of the sellers efforts? What then? In this small of a community people pay for their mistakes. With that said, there is a point that the wronged party can take it too far. You have been here two years, you have never seen that happen?

 

I am with Joe on this one. It should be more of an objective standard. If restitution is offered, and it clearly is intended to or would make the aggrieved party whole, then that is what should be analyzed for removal from the PL. Whether or not the aggrieved party takes the restitution should not be the defining characteristic.

 

Also for me, this is not about QC, because they may or may not have multiple offenses. It is about my belief that no one should be able to keep someone on the PL by rejecting restitution.