• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

~~THE~~GIVING~~TREE~~
6 6

Started by HarveySwick,

7,208 posts in this topic

jaeldubyoo

jaeldubyoo

Posted
Posted

I sure hate to see this thread die. And I'm willing to put up some offers to get it started again. However, there are some things I'd like to see changed. The thread has been up long enough so that we can see what works and doesn’t work. I know it’s HarvelySwick’s thread and he decides what goes on here, but sometimes changes are needed.

 

The idea that somebody gets a strike for putting up decent offers and nobody chooses any, yet there is no veto, doesn’t seem right. I feel that if somebody's offers are not taken and they do not get a veto from the previous giver, they should not get a strike. But at the same time they should not receive the offer they chose. It should revert back to the previous offer(s). It only seems fair that if none of your offers get taken, then you should not receive the offer you picked.

 

The RAKs are great. But they should be in a separate thread. The RAKs often dominate the thread and take away from the offers. Sometimes the RAKs and RAK discussion overshadow the offers. If the RAKs were in another thread, there would be a lot less distraction from the offers. After all, what is the main focus of the thread?

 

Anybody else have any comments or ideas? Or is this really the end?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
vaillant

vaillant

Posted
Posted

I quite agree with Johnny, especially on the first part. Wall Crawler's and the last offer were definitely good offers, so there should be some distinction between what does not get taken because it’s quite lousy and what does not get taken simply because it’s not the right moment (in a different moment I could have taken one of Wall Crawler's offers).

 

BTW, I just received his first offer, and the books are great! Thanks pal!

The improved Marvel Spotlight #32 is… :cloud9: compared to my previous VG copy.

 

l6gSsSNh.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
HarveySwick

HarveySwick

Posted
  • Author
Posted
But at the same time they should not receive the offer they chose. It should revert back to the previous offer(s). It only seems fair that if none of your offers get taken, then you should not receive the offer you picked.

That's PIF. In that case, why not just jump in PIF? (shrug)

The idea that somebody gets a strike for putting up decent offers and nobody chooses any, yet there is no veto, doesn’t seem right.

So, what do you propose to do when someone puts up an "ok" offer and it just sits there for three days and stalls the thread. Despite numerous people suggesting that they should switch up their offer or try something else, they don't. Should they not get a strike? (shrug) And then if your response is they shouldn't get a strike if it's a "decent offer" - who determines if it's a decent offer?

 

I thought about eliminating the strike rule if your offer isn't claimed with the caveat that you can't offer up the stuff that went unclaimed ever again, but what's the point. :P People could just hold back potential offerings anyway knowing - eh, if this isn't claimed, I have more stuff for the next time. And the veto thing doesn't necessarily work as it should because people are timid that several other "participants" will jump all over the person for using the veto with claims of "negativity." :eyeroll: PIF is enough. People should just jump in that thread if they want to participate in a thread like this. There are already a handful of dedicated participants more than willing to take your stuff. :whee:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
HarveySwick

HarveySwick

Posted
  • Author
Posted
there should be some distinction between what does not get taken because it’s quite lousy and what does not get taken simply because it’s not the right moment

Claudio, in all honesty, could you EVER say someone's offer wasn't a good offer? Everything is great! :preach:

 

There's no way to determine if people are being honest and true with their offers. You'd like to believe that this is supposed to be an honorable thread, but I learned from moderating this thread - not everyone feels that way. Some look to simply bolster their collection at the cost of others and don't CARE to give back to this community. They're looking out for #1. :sorry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
HarveySwick

HarveySwick

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Honestly, they were suitable offers (the two I mentioned).

 

When an offer is lousy I usually don’t comment upon it, so you can have an idea from that… ;)

So, that's ok? Only be the good guy and never the bad guy? meh

 

Who should be the "bad guy" or the "negative guy" or the guy with the "righteous indignation"? Who should be the one to comment - Um, kind sir, that offer is not up to snuff. Please kindly change up your offer up. :foryou:

 

If you really want these threads to work - be honest. Don't always be "nice" - just be honest. Being silent when you see something that isn't up to par is such a selfish thing to do if you truly care about these threads and want them to work. :makepoint:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
HarveySwick

HarveySwick

Posted
  • Author
Posted
You have definitely an artistic quality to read things in people’s words when they are not there… :D

When an offer is lousy I usually don’t comment upon it, so you can have an idea from that… ;)

m1703.gif

 

When an offer isn't good, I keep my mouth shut.

When an offer is good, I like to say "great offer!"

 

Yeah, I'm a Picasso of interpretation alright! :acclaim:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
HarveySwick

HarveySwick

Posted
  • Author
Posted
How do you interpret this?

I am really not following you… and the reason for which you think not commenting is a "neutral" stance: it’s not.

So, what is the reason for not commenting when an offer is subpar? I would think it's because you don't want to be seen as "being negative" but I guess I've gotten it all wrong.

 

What is your reason for not commenting when you don't think an offer is good? :popcorn:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CAHokie

CAHokie

Posted
Posted

I don't mind the commenting when it is great and not commenting when it is not. The worst is when someone would say great offer, when it was horribly insulting compared to what they claimed.

 

Swick is right, this type of thread is extremely hard to run. No wonder it lasted less than 2 months. I had great hope for it though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
vaillant

vaillant

Posted
Posted
How do you interpret this?

I am really not following you… and the reason for which you think not commenting is a "neutral" stance: it’s not.

So, what is the reason for not commenting when an offer is subpar? I would think it's because you don't want to be seen as "being negative" but I guess I've gotten it all wrong.

 

What is your reason for not commenting when you don't think an offer is good? :popcorn:

 

It’s obviously not: I tend to see mostly the negative all the time (in many situations) – it‘s a tendency I have, so I work against it.

It also clearly depends on how you "don’t comment". I prefer to comment when I see an evolution to the situation, as it usually helps to judge with more balance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jaeldubyoo

jaeldubyoo

Posted
Posted
But at the same time they should not receive the offer they chose. It should revert back to the previous offer(s). It only seems fair that if none of your offers get taken, then you should not receive the offer you picked.

That's PIF. In that case, why not just jump in PIF. (shrug)

The idea that somebody gets a strike for putting up decent offers and nobody chooses any, yet there is no veto, doesn’t seem right.

So, what do you propose to do when someone puts up an "ok" offer and it just sits there for three days and stalls the thread. Despite numerous people suggesting that they should switch up their offer or try something else, they don't. Should they not get a strike? (shrug) And then if your response is they shouldn't get a strike if it's a "decent offer" - who determines if it's a decent offer?

 

I thought about eliminating the strike rule if your offer isn't claimed with the caveat that you can't offer up the stuff that went unclaimed ever again, but what's the point. :P People could just hold back potential offerings anyway knowing - eh, if this isn't claimed, I have more stuff for the next time. And the veto thing doesn't necessarily work as it should because people are timid that several other "participants" will jump all over the person for using the veto with claims of "negativity." :eyeroll: PIF is enough. People should just jump in that thread if they want to participate in a thread like this. There are already a handful of dedicated participants more than willing to take their stuff. :whee:

 

It becomes an issue of fairness. Why should you receive something, when you are offering nothing in effect? You take, but don't give back. This has nothing to do with being like PIF. It's a basic principle that should be inherent in this kind of thread. It doesn't matter whether it's the PIF or TGT thread.

 

Public opinion on this thread helps keep things in check. I know you've commented on whether or not offers are appropriate. Others have been vocal about inadequate offers. I'm sure those who are "timid" can see public sentiment and will act accordingly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CAHokie

CAHokie

Posted
Posted
How do you interpret this?

I am really not following you… and the reason for which you think not commenting is a "neutral" stance: it’s not.

So, what is the reason for not commenting when an offer is subpar? I would think it's because you don't want to be seen as "being negative" but I guess I've gotten it all wrong.

 

What is your reason for not commenting when you don't think an offer is good? :popcorn:

 

It’s obviously not: I tend to see mostly the negative all the time (in many situations) – it‘s a tendency I have, so I work against it.

It also clearly depends on how you "don’t comment". I prefer to comment when I see an evolution to the situation, as it usually helps to judge with more balance.

 

There are different ways of NOT commenting?? ???

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CAHokie

CAHokie

Posted
Posted
Swick is right, this type of thread is extremely hard to run. No wonder it lasted less than 2 months. I had great hope for it though.

 

I am missing your Spidey avatar… :hi:

 

 

It will be back after College Football season. Heck..as bad as VT is playing I should put it back now. lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
6 6
Go to topic listing