PROBATION DISCUSSIONS 21 21

[Bosco685]

Again the guy was wrong in dragging out the sale... but the PL discussion board and 72 hour notification rule did what it was supposed to do if the guy offered to pay for the item... which is complete the sale.

 

That is the intent of this thread before someone lands on the PL or HOS. Even when BuckOne played Spiderman-On-Tilt for a little while, he was given a chance to complete the transaction when he originally attempted not to pay. And he definitely was not the politest fellow in that engagement.

 

Either we are consistent in this thread what the intent is (NO MATTER HOW WE FEEL ABOUT ONE ANOTHER), or this is nothing but a part-time fix with no real guidelines and expectations.

[Speedy-D]

I was kinda hoping the "it's fun to attack and insult RMA" days were behind us.

 

That wasn't what happened Speedy and you know it.

 

He used the threat of PL to call a guy out to complete a transaction... then said he wasn't going to sell him the book AND continue with trying to put him on the PL.

 

No matter how dbagy the guy was, that can't be done.

 

And I'm not taking the guy's side either, he should have just paid for the book... but RMA bringing it here and going through the motions to get to the point to nominate the guy for inclusion to the PL... is the steps to COMPLETE a transactions that has been started between two boardies.

 

Its not right to dangle completion and then go all coitus interruptus on the guy no matter how bad his attitude is in the sales bed.

 

Knowing RMA's pleasantness here on the boards, I'm sure his notification of PL discussion and 72 hour time frame was probably the most sweet and sincere thing the guy had ever read as well.

 

Again the guy was wrong in dragging out the sale... but the PL discussion board and 72 hour notification rule did what it was supposed to do if the guy offered to pay for the item... which is complete the sale.

Really? You questioned his sanity, and said you've done so on many occasions. Sorry if I'm wrong, but that felt like standard jump-on-RMA stuff. Would you have said that to me if I offered someone up for the PL, the dude was then a person_who_is_obnoxiously_self-impressed and I said I no longer wanted to have anything to do with him?

 

Once he was told he couldn't put the kid on the PL without having to be open to a resolution, he let it go, no?

[Bosco685]

This thread is to allow general discussion of the community run probation issues and cases so that the main thread can remain dedicated to the core facts and updating of the list rather than the surrounding debates and speculation.

 

This should probably state the end results expected in this thread so people do not forget.

 

1. Identify a sales or purchase situation.

 

2. Attempt to work out the transaction issues.

 

3. In the event a solution cannot be agreed to, probation-worthy activity lands you on that list; HOS-worthy activity leads to a community vote and posting to that list if a majority decision is made.

 

4. Later resolution can get you off the PL if the offended party agrees to the resolution.

Edited July 23, 2013 by Bosco685

[Bio-Rupp]

I was kinda hoping the "it's fun to attack and insult RMA" days were behind us.

 

That wasn't what happened Speedy and you know it.

 

He used the threat of PL to call a guy out to complete a transaction... then said he wasn't going to sell him the book AND continue with trying to put him on the PL.

 

No matter how dbagy the guy was, that can't be done.

 

And I'm not taking the guy's side either, he should have just paid for the book... but RMA bringing it here and going through the motions to get to the point to nominate the guy for inclusion to the PL... is the steps to COMPLETE a transactions that has been started between two boardies.

 

Its not right to dangle completion and then go all coitus interruptus on the guy no matter how bad his attitude is in the sales bed.

 

Knowing RMA's pleasantness here on the boards, I'm sure his notification of PL discussion and 72 hour time frame was probably the most sweet and sincere thing the guy had ever read as well.

 

Again the guy was wrong in dragging out the sale... but the PL discussion board and 72 hour notification rule did what it was supposed to do if the guy offered to pay for the item... which is complete the sale.

Really? You questioned his sanity, and said you've done so on many occasions. Sorry if I'm wrong, but that felt like standard jump-on-RMA stuff. Would you have said that to me if I offered someone up for the PL, the dude was then a person_who_is_obnoxiously_self-impressed and I said I no longer wanted to have anything to do with him?

 

Once he was told he couldn't put the kid on the PL without having to be open to a resolution, he let it go, no?

 

Yes Speedy, I probably would have if you would have offered someone up to the PL and acted the same way.

 

The way its now beginning to appear is that RMA wasn't going to sell the book to the kid no matter what the kid did.

 

RMA himself stated this...

 

I accept the fact that he cannot be put on the PL if he offers to pay. I was hoping he would ignore that, so that he could be put on the probation list.

 

I read that as "I don't want him to pay now (after using the PL discussion board's 72 hour response rule to make him pay)... I want to stick it to him".

 

I am not an RMA basher. Yep I question his sanity... but that's not bashing.

 

Just pointing out that RMA can't use the PL discussion board to make someone pay, then not accept their payment, and then be disappointed he can't put them on the PL list.

 

My comment about his sanity stems from RMA stating my posts were out of some sort of spite towards him... which isn't the case since I want him to complete the sale.

 

I just think he's mad because his actions show what spite is and he's using the PL discussion board not for it's intended use, which I hate to tell you first and foremost is to "complete" transactions" between boardies.

 

The PL list warns others of uncompleted transactions... the discussion trys to prevent it from getting that far.

 

[lscomics]

It almost seems like there should be a third option for dealing with people like this. I don't disagree that there should be a way for a member to get themselves off the PL but if they're playing the system or sit on the PL for X amount of time then maybe there should be another list that is reserved for such offenses. Either that or there needs to be changes made to the current policy that the PL is only to be considered a temporary punishment. Also, what about repeat offenders? If someone is put on the PL multiple times and keeps getting themselves out of it only when it's convenient for them to do so then shouldn't that be taken into account? After being placed on the PL three times, perhaps they should automatically be shuffled off to the HOS.

 

Questionable behavior doesn't have a time limit and I don't think that when someone behaves like kitsune has in this instance should be overlooked. How long will it be until he does it again? Letting him off the hook here is opening the door for a whirlwind of problems. It's not fair to insist RMA, whether you like him or not, complete a transaction with someone who, based on his response to the situation, could very well cause more stress for a guy who was just trying to sell some books by doing a charge back just to be vindictive.

 

Something should be done about this. What exactly that is though isn't 100% clear.

[Bosco685]

At one point, someone had the idea of maintaining a historic probation list inventory for buyers and sellers to reference (Count??). This way, even if someone was later removed, the transaction concern could be referenced for later sales consideration.

 

I think it was going to get tricky how to track this while still being fair to the folks that made the effort to resolve their transgressions.

[Bosco685]

Questionable behavior doesn't have a time limit and I don't think that when someone behaves like kitsune has in this instance should be overlooked. How long will it be until he does it again? Letting him off the hook here is opening the door for a whirlwind of problems. It's not fair to insist RMA, whether you like him or not, complete a transaction with someone who, based on his response to the situation, could very well cause more stress for a guy who was just trying to sell some books by doing a charge back just to be vindictive.

 

Again, going back to the BuckOne situation, I think Spiderman-On-Tilt went through with the transaction and something occurred like a chargeback or attempted chargeback. But I could be wrong. That may have been John's main concern.

 

But it does make sense if afterwards as a seller you are not comfortable, nobody should force you to deal with another person if you think it is going to end up bad. But then you eliminate your ability to recommend them to the PL or HOS as the offending party offered to resolve the situation.

[lscomics]

At one point, someone had the idea of maintaining a historic probation list inventory for buyers and sellers to reference (Count??). This way, even if someone was later removed, the transaction concern could be referenced for later sales consideration.

 

I think it was going to get tricky how to track this while still being fair to the folks that made the effort to resolve their transgressions.

Like a probation history list? That might be effective but would take lot of work to put together unless it's something that starts now and overlooks all the past transgressions.

[Speedy-D]

I was kinda hoping the "it's fun to attack and insult RMA" days were behind us.

 

That wasn't what happened Speedy and you know it.

 

He used the threat of PL to call a guy out to complete a transaction... then said he wasn't going to sell him the book AND continue with trying to put him on the PL.

 

No matter how dbagy the guy was, that can't be done.

 

And I'm not taking the guy's side either, he should have just paid for the book... but RMA bringing it here and going through the motions to get to the point to nominate the guy for inclusion to the PL... is the steps to COMPLETE a transactions that has been started between two boardies.

 

Its not right to dangle completion and then go all coitus interruptus on the guy no matter how bad his attitude is in the sales bed.

 

Knowing RMA's pleasantness here on the boards, I'm sure his notification of PL discussion and 72 hour time frame was probably the most sweet and sincere thing the guy had ever read as well.

 

Again the guy was wrong in dragging out the sale... but the PL discussion board and 72 hour notification rule did what it was supposed to do if the guy offered to pay for the item... which is complete the sale.

Really? You questioned his sanity, and said you've done so on many occasions. Sorry if I'm wrong, but that felt like standard jump-on-RMA stuff. Would you have said that to me if I offered someone up for the PL, the dude was then a person_who_is_obnoxiously_self-impressed and I said I no longer wanted to have anything to do with him?

 

Once he was told he couldn't put the kid on the PL without having to be open to a resolution, he let it go, no?

 

Yes Speedy, I probably would have if you would have offered someone up to the PL and acted the same way.

 

The way its now beginning to appear is that RMA wasn't going to sell the book to the kid no matter what the kid did.

 

RMA himself stated this...

 

I accept the fact that he cannot be put on the PL if he offers to pay. I was hoping he would ignore that, so that he could be put on the probation list.

 

I read that as "I don't want him to pay now (after using the PL discussion board's 72 hour response rule to make him pay)... I want to stick it to him".

 

I am not an RMA basher. Yep I question his sanity... but that's not bashing.

 

Just pointing out that RMA can't use the PL discussion board to make someone pay, then not accept their payment, and then be disappointed he can't put them on the PL list.

 

My comment about his sanity stems from RMA stating my posts were out of some sort of spite towards him... which isn't the case since I want him to complete the sale.

 

I just think he's mad because his actions show what spite is and he's using the PL discussion board not for it's intended use, which I hate to tell you first and foremost is to "complete" transactions" between boardies.

 

The PL list warns others of uncompleted transactions... the discussion trys to prevent it from getting that far.

Ok, truce. I still doubt you'd tell me that you've questioned my sanity many times before, but hey, maybe you have!

[Speedy-D]

It almost seems like there should be a third option for dealing with people like this. I don't disagree that there should be a way for a member to get themselves off the PL but if they're playing the system or sit on the PL for X amount of time then maybe there should be another list that is reserved for such offenses. Either that or there needs to be changes made to the current policy that the PL is only to be considered a temporary punishment. Also, what about repeat offenders? If someone is put on the PL multiple times and keeps getting themselves out of it only when it's convenient for them to do so then shouldn't that be taken into account? After being placed on the PL three times, perhaps they should automatically be shuffled off to the HOS.

 

Questionable behavior doesn't have a time limit and I don't think that when someone behaves like kitsune has in this instance should be overlooked. How long will it be until he does it again? Letting him off the hook here is opening the door for a whirlwind of problems. It's not fair to insist RMA, whether you like him or not, complete a transaction with someone who, based on his response to the situation, could very well cause more stress for a guy who was just trying to sell some books by doing a charge back just to be vindictive.

 

Something should be done about this. What exactly that is though isn't 100% clear.

Don't forget, once you're put in the PL, there's a permanent record of it. You'll forever be listed in the PL thread, and in the discussion thread. If you're a repeat offender, you'll be in there a lot.

[Bosco685]

At one point, someone had the idea of maintaining a historic probation list inventory for buyers and sellers to reference (Count??). This way, even if someone was later removed, the transaction concern could be referenced for later sales consideration.

 

I think it was going to get tricky how to track this while still being fair to the folks that made the effort to resolve their transgressions.

Like a probation history list? That might be effective but would take lot of work to put together unless it's something that starts now and overlooks all the past transgressions.

 

That was one of the concerns. Who was going to maintain all those historic details?

 

But the bigger concern was if someone resolved a one-time situation, should they be "punished" forever by having their name in a historic reference list of PL-worthy activity? It could be perceived as extreme.

[lscomics]

But it does make sense if afterwards as a seller you are not comfortable, nobody should force you to deal with another person if you think it is going to end up bad. But then you eliminate your ability to recommend them to the PL or HOS as the offending party offered to resolve the situation.

That's exactly the problem though. A member that does something like this shouldn't just walk away unscathed. There's a lot of board members that don't keep up with or in some cases even know about the PL or PL Discussion threads. As a community those that do, from my point of view, have a certain responsibility to watch out for the rest of the boards.

[Speedy-D]

At one point, someone had the idea of maintaining a historic probation list inventory for buyers and sellers to reference (Count??). This way, even if someone was later removed, the transaction concern could be referenced for later sales consideration.

 

I think it was going to get tricky how to track this while still being fair to the folks that made the effort to resolve their transgressions.

Like a probation history list? That might be effective but would take lot of work to put together unless it's something that starts now and overlooks all the past transgressions.

 

That was one of the concerns. Who was going to maintain all those historic details?

 

But the bigger concern was if someone resolved a one-time situation, should they be "punished" forever by having their name in a historic reference list of PL-worthy activity? It could be perceived as extreme.

They're already permanently in the PL thread.

[Speedy-D]

But it does make sense if afterwards as a seller you are not comfortable, nobody should force you to deal with another person if you think it is going to end up bad. But then you eliminate your ability to recommend them to the PL or HOS as the offending party offered to resolve the situation.

That's exactly the problem though. A member that does something like this shouldn't just walk away unscathed. There's a lot of board members that don't keep up with or in some cases even know about the PL or PL Discussion threads. As a community those that do, from my point of view, have a certain responsibility to watch out for the rest of the boards.

I hear what you're saying ... but if we're talking about protecting people who don't pay attention to the PL or HoS, how is creating a third list gonna help?

[Bio-Rupp]

I was kinda hoping the "it's fun to attack and insult RMA" days were behind us.

 

That wasn't what happened Speedy and you know it.

 

He used the threat of PL to call a guy out to complete a transaction... then said he wasn't going to sell him the book AND continue with trying to put him on the PL.

 

No matter how dbagy the guy was, that can't be done.

 

And I'm not taking the guy's side either, he should have just paid for the book... but RMA bringing it here and going through the motions to get to the point to nominate the guy for inclusion to the PL... is the steps to COMPLETE a transactions that has been started between two boardies.

 

Its not right to dangle completion and then go all coitus interruptus on the guy no matter how bad his attitude is in the sales bed.

 

Knowing RMA's pleasantness here on the boards, I'm sure his notification of PL discussion and 72 hour time frame was probably the most sweet and sincere thing the guy had ever read as well.

 

Again the guy was wrong in dragging out the sale... but the PL discussion board and 72 hour notification rule did what it was supposed to do if the guy offered to pay for the item... which is complete the sale.

Really? You questioned his sanity, and said you've done so on many occasions. Sorry if I'm wrong, but that felt like standard jump-on-RMA stuff. Would you have said that to me if I offered someone up for the PL, the dude was then a person_who_is_obnoxiously_self-impressed and I said I no longer wanted to have anything to do with him?

 

Once he was told he couldn't put the kid on the PL without having to be open to a resolution, he let it go, no?

 

Yes Speedy, I probably would have if you would have offered someone up to the PL and acted the same way.

 

The way its now beginning to appear is that RMA wasn't going to sell the book to the kid no matter what the kid did.

 

RMA himself stated this...

 

I accept the fact that he cannot be put on the PL if he offers to pay. I was hoping he would ignore that, so that he could be put on the probation list.

 

I read that as "I don't want him to pay now (after using the PL discussion board's 72 hour response rule to make him pay)... I want to stick it to him".

 

I am not an RMA basher. Yep I question his sanity... but that's not bashing.

 

Just pointing out that RMA can't use the PL discussion board to make someone pay, then not accept their payment, and then be disappointed he can't put them on the PL list.

 

My comment about his sanity stems from RMA stating my posts were out of some sort of spite towards him... which isn't the case since I want him to complete the sale.

 

I just think he's mad because his actions show what spite is and he's using the PL discussion board not for it's intended use, which I hate to tell you first and foremost is to "complete" transactions" between boardies.

 

The PL list warns others of uncompleted transactions... the discussion trys to prevent it from getting that far.

Ok, truce. I still doubt you'd tell me that you've questioned my sanity many times before, but hey, maybe you have!

 

Oh I don't question yours... you are as nutzo crazy as me

 

[lscomics]

At one point, someone had the idea of maintaining a historic probation list inventory for buyers and sellers to reference (Count??). This way, even if someone was later removed, the transaction concern could be referenced for later sales consideration.

 

I think it was going to get tricky how to track this while still being fair to the folks that made the effort to resolve their transgressions.

Like a probation history list? That might be effective but would take lot of work to put together unless it's something that starts now and overlooks all the past transgressions.

 

That was one of the concerns. Who was going to maintain all those historic details?

 

But the bigger concern was if someone resolved a one-time situation, should they be "punished" forever by having their name in a historic reference list of PL-worthy activity? It could be perceived as extreme.

Technically, isn't that already the case with the PL? If you go back through it you'll find people on there that have made amends and gotten themselves removed but the fact that they were on the PL is still there if someone wants to take the time to look.

[Speedy-D]

At one point, someone had the idea of maintaining a historic probation list inventory for buyers and sellers to reference (Count??). This way, even if someone was later removed, the transaction concern could be referenced for later sales consideration.

 

I think it was going to get tricky how to track this while still being fair to the folks that made the effort to resolve their transgressions.

Like a probation history list? That might be effective but would take lot of work to put together unless it's something that starts now and overlooks all the past transgressions.

 

That was one of the concerns. Who was going to maintain all those historic details?

 

But the bigger concern was if someone resolved a one-time situation, should they be "punished" forever by having their name in a historic reference list of PL-worthy activity? It could be perceived as extreme.

Technically, isn't that already the case with the PL? If you go back through it you'll find people on there that have made amends and gotten themselves removed but the fact that they were on the PL is still there if someone wants to take the time to look.

PAY ATTENTION TO ME!!

[lscomics]

But it does make sense if afterwards as a seller you are not comfortable, nobody should force you to deal with another person if you think it is going to end up bad. But then you eliminate your ability to recommend them to the PL or HOS as the offending party offered to resolve the situation.

That's exactly the problem though. A member that does something like this shouldn't just walk away unscathed. There's a lot of board members that don't keep up with or in some cases even know about the PL or PL Discussion threads. As a community those that do, from my point of view, have a certain responsibility to watch out for the rest of the boards.

I hear what you're saying ... but if we're talking about protecting people who don't pay attention to the PL or HoS, how is creating a third list gonna help?

Maybe the Mods should be petitioned to place a thread with a link to the PL & HOS at the top of every sales forum to increase the awareness. It should be a locked thread so comments can't be added but it may help increase people's awareness.

[Bosco685]

They're already permanently in the PL thread.

 

I hear ya on history. But have you tried to use the search feature to go back further than two years and see what the results are?

 

The details are all there. The challenge is finding it easily, which is what some wanted to do a few times. When Count redesigned the list format, that is one of the things he attempted to address.

[mikenyc]

Maybe those who openly sell to members on the PL shouldn't seek any remedy from the very thing they spit on. Seems pretty hypocritical.