General discussion thread - keep the other threads clean 29 29

[joe_collector]

So what would it be, say two months and 200 posts?

 

That sounds good to me, and if it cuts down on their newbie scam artists mass-selling on our boards, then it's a good thing.

[Speedy-D]

So what would it be, say two months and 200 posts?

 

That sounds good to me, and if it cuts down on their newbie scam artists mass-selling on our boards, then it's a good thing.

Shall we start a poll, give 'er a couple weeks, and bring it to Arch if people are in favor? We could start the poll in its own thread in CG, so discussions wouldn't get lost in the shuffle.

[bababooey]

I think if Arch responded to Bosco saying he expects us to read the boilerplate warning/links to PL/HOS rather than threadkrapping PL/HOS'ers....it's pretty safe to say that he'd probably also expect those people who don't wish to buy from someone with "less than 100 posts or 30 days on the board" by simply to the left of the body of the sellers post.

 

That post has about as much sense as an empty wallet.

 

You do realize that no one is complaining about not being able to see their post count, but that these scamming nitwits are mass-infiltrating the boards, making fraudulent use of our goodwill, and ripping off less-careful members.

 

I feel bad for the guys who have to chase their dough & hope they get it back - I'm not laughing at them at all, I'm laughing at Speedy - he's read all the earlier posts & he knows that Arch laid down the law on NOT wanting people posting warnings in active sales threads hosted by PL/HOS members "because" there is a warning template on the forum.....

...just as there is a post count/join date on every person's post...when they post.

 

My point is that a much less obvious warning was held as adequate by Arch.

 

Clearer?

[HarveySwick]

Trying to read through all of this. All I can say is Hector is one of the nicest, most level-headed guys out there. And yes, before you all jump up and down that he's my friend - he is. (thumbs u

 

I wouldn't say he's an auto-contrarian at all. He just does what he thinks is right and just and doesn't always jump on the mob mentality bandwagon. Maybe it's because he's a n00b as am I. However, I have noticed that there are a few people that ONLY contribute negativity and venom and don't spread a lot of positive things. But that's just coming from my n00b eyes, so what do I know?

 

I 100% do agree that HusTrucK is no good and should be on some list, but I think unless Ben/CAHokie nominates him, how could he. None of his shenanigans took place on the Boards. My and nothing else.

 

[Speedy-D]

I think if Arch responded to Bosco saying he expects us to read the boilerplate warning/links to PL/HOS rather than threadkrapping PL/HOS'ers....it's pretty safe to say that he'd probably also expect those people who don't wish to buy from someone with "less than 100 posts or 30 days on the board" by simply to the left of the body of the sellers post.

 

That post has about as much sense as an empty wallet.

 

You do realize that no one is complaining about not being able to see their post count, but that these scamming nitwits are mass-infiltrating the boards, making fraudulent use of our goodwill, and ripping off less-careful members.

 

I feel bad for the guys who have to chase their dough & hope they get it back - I'm not laughing at them at all, I'm laughing at Speedy - he's read all the earlier posts & he knows that Arch laid down the law on NOT wanting people posting warnings in active sales threads hosted by PL/HOS members "because" there is a warning template on the forum.....

...just as there is a post count/join date on every person's post...when they post.

 

My point is that a much less obvious warning was held as adequate by Arch.

 

Clearer?

O, I know you ain't laughing at me!!

 

I'd swear I remember someone saying that Arch wasn't totally opposed to the minimum post thing a while back. And even if that's not the case, Arch's reasons for not wanting us to point out and ostracize PL/HoSers would not apply to this notion of a minimum post count/time on the Boards. They're just not the same thing.

[DR.X]

So what would it be, say two months and 200 posts?

 

That sounds good to me, and if it cuts down on their newbie scam artists mass-selling on our boards, then it's a good thing.

 

Me too. We have newbs flooding in here like roache's and selling high dollar books right out of the gate, and it's happening more and more.

 

If this place is going to survive and be know as a great place to buy, sell, and discuss books, you have to have a sense of credibility, and earn it. We all did.

[Speedy-D]

Trying to read through all of this. All I can say is Hector is one of the nicest, most level-headed guys out there. And yes, before you all jump up and down that he's my friend - he is. (thumbs u

 

I wouldn't say he's an auto-contrarian at all. He just does what he thinks is right and just and doesn't always jump on the mob mentality bandwagon. Maybe it's because he's a n00b as am I. However, I have noticed that there are a few people that ONLY contribute negativity and venom and don't spread a lot of positive things. But that's just coming from my n00b eyes, so what do I know?

 

I 100% do agree that HusTrucK is no good and should be on some list, but I think unless Ben/CAHokie nominates him, how could he. None of his shenanigans took place on the Boards. My and nothing else.

The shenanigans don't have to take place on the Boards, but they do have to affect a Boardie in a real way. Close escapes, unfortunately, don't fit into the system as it stands.

[CAHokie]

Trying to read through all of this. All I can say is Hector is one of the nicest, most level-headed guys out there. And yes, before you all jump up and down that he's my friend - he is. (thumbs u

 

I wouldn't say he's an auto-contrarian at all. He just does what he thinks is right and just and doesn't always jump on the mob mentality bandwagon. Maybe it's because he's a n00b as am I. However, I have noticed that there are a few people that ONLY contribute negativity and venom and don't spread a lot of positive things. But that's just coming from my n00b eyes, so what do I know?

 

I 100% do agree that HusTrucK is no good and should be on some list, but I think unless Ben/CAHokie nominates him, how could he. None of his shenanigans took place on the Boards. My and nothing else.

 

Harvey,

 

I can't nominate him because he fixed the problem exactly as I asked him to and I was not out any money. Unless I can nominate him for a being a person_who_is_obnoxiously_self-impressed?

[bababooey]

I think if Arch responded to Bosco saying he expects us to read the boilerplate warning/links to PL/HOS rather than threadkrapping PL/HOS'ers....it's pretty safe to say that he'd probably also expect those people who don't wish to buy from someone with "less than 100 posts or 30 days on the board" by simply to the left of the body of the sellers post.

 

That post has about as much sense as an empty wallet.

 

You do realize that no one is complaining about not being able to see their post count, but that these scamming nitwits are mass-infiltrating the boards, making fraudulent use of our goodwill, and ripping off less-careful members.

 

I feel bad for the guys who have to chase their dough & hope they get it back - I'm not laughing at them at all, I'm laughing at Speedy - he's read all the earlier posts & he knows that Arch laid down the law on NOT wanting people posting warnings in active sales threads hosted by PL/HOS members "because" there is a warning template on the forum.....

...just as there is a post count/join date on every person's post...when they post.

 

My point is that a much less obvious warning was held as adequate by Arch.

 

Clearer?

O, I know you ain't laughing at me!!

 

I'd swear I remember someone saying that Arch wasn't totally opposed to the minimum post thing a while back. And even if that's not the case, Arch's reasons for not wanting us to point out and ostracize PL/HoSers would not apply to this notion of a minimum post count/time on the Boards. They're just not the same thing.

They are the same thing if you boil it down to "people being responsible for their buys/sells" - which was the PL/HOS template reasoning.

 

The fact that this criteria of "post count/longevity" are visible on the page you are throwing up your TAKE IT makes it a more obvious "red flag" to those who see it as one, than the other PL/HOS template which isn't part of the sales thread.

 

 

[Speedy-D]

I think if Arch responded to Bosco saying he expects us to read the boilerplate warning/links to PL/HOS rather than threadkrapping PL/HOS'ers....it's pretty safe to say that he'd probably also expect those people who don't wish to buy from someone with "less than 100 posts or 30 days on the board" by simply to the left of the body of the sellers post.

 

That post has about as much sense as an empty wallet.

 

You do realize that no one is complaining about not being able to see their post count, but that these scamming nitwits are mass-infiltrating the boards, making fraudulent use of our goodwill, and ripping off less-careful members.

 

I feel bad for the guys who have to chase their dough & hope they get it back - I'm not laughing at them at all, I'm laughing at Speedy - he's read all the earlier posts & he knows that Arch laid down the law on NOT wanting people posting warnings in active sales threads hosted by PL/HOS members "because" there is a warning template on the forum.....

...just as there is a post count/join date on every person's post...when they post.

 

My point is that a much less obvious warning was held as adequate by Arch.

 

Clearer?

O, I know you ain't laughing at me!!

 

I'd swear I remember someone saying that Arch wasn't totally opposed to the minimum post thing a while back. And even if that's not the case, Arch's reasons for not wanting us to point out and ostracize PL/HoSers would not apply to this notion of a minimum post count/time on the Boards. They're just not the same thing.

They are the same thing if you boil it down to "people being responsible for their buys/sells" - which was the PL/HOS template reasoning.

 

The fact that this criteria of "post count/longevity" are visible on the page you are throwing up your TAKE IT makes it a more obvious "red flag" to those who see it as one, than the other PL/HOS template which isn't part of the sales thread.

 

If you boil it down to that, then every rule we have is the same thing.

 

And yes, of course you can see the post count and date joined in each post, but nonetheless, we have noob scammer after noob scammer coming here, filling up the sales forums with chumpbait and taking up everyone's time and attention. Wouldn't it be nice to do something about that? Aside from thinking that Arch might not go for it, I don't really see why you'd be opposed.

[slym2none]

If you want to do something like this, it's gotta be done at the Boards' software level, which mans getting Arch on board.

 

But if it's not possible there, even putting limits in the Guidelines allow users to report said scammers and get the thread removed ASAP. When people see a transgression noted in a sales thread, they are also much less likely to bid foolishly.

 

I think you would need something like a consensus before approaching Arch about limiting the ability of new members to sell (or buy). I'm strongly in favor of it, particularly in light of the number of recent scam selling threads. But when it's been discussed in the past there have been some pretty strong objections, so I don't think a consensus is possible.

I used to object, but now I've flipflopped. So, y'know, that's one less objection.

 

Or one more flipflop.

 

 

I object!

 

 

 

 

-slym

[joe_collector]

I would also note that lots of other forums I frequent have limits on who can post For Sale ads, and with so many high-dollar comics floating around, it's needed even more here.

 

And yes, the post count and date joined are on the page, but the speedometer is also clearly marked on every car, yet people still speed and break the law.

[bababooey]

I'm not opposed to it, if we're being targeted by one or more scammers maybe it's time for something like that.

 

I think a poll is a good idea in CG.

 

Take the temperature of the community on whether or not a PL/HOS member should be able to host a sales thread while you're at it - I did a poll last April ITT & the overwhelming majority did not want PL/HOS to sell here - we should be able to button hump them for deletion if the community overwhelmingly agrees (90% plus) that PL/HOS should not sell here (PL/HOS threadkrapping problem disappears)

 

 

 

 

 

 

[HarveySwick]

I haven't said anything about this but I've been thinking about it since it was initially brought up!

 

I think it's a great idea! If there was enough push, could this actually be done? Veterans? Could it be? I mean - sort of a probationary period? That way we could easily eliminate the perpetual, almost daily scammers that sign up either to try to rip people off or just stir the pot.

[THE_BEYONDER]

I haven't said anything about this but I've been thinking about it since it was initially brought up!

 

I think it's a great idea! If there was enough push, could this actually be done? Veterans? Could it be? I mean - sort of a probationary period? That way we could easily eliminate the perpetual, almost daily scammers that sign up either to try to rip people off or just stir the pot.

 

Or we could just keep on keepin on & torch the offenders as they show up....

[HarveySwick]

It gets old after awhile though.

 

I was just wondering this the other day. There are periods of time when there are like 2 or 3 "noobs" that pop up that have BS sales threads or just post randomly stirring the pot.

 

Is this one banned member creating multiple shill accounts or do you think there could be a collaboration by a couple of them just to kind of through out an FU to the Boards and just be nudges? It just seems way too much of a coincidence to have several different scammers/shills pop up around the same time?

[Speedy-D]

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=7387367

[Logan510]

Trying to read through all of this. All I can say is Hector is one of the nicest, most level-headed guys out there. And yes, before you all jump up and down that he's my friend - he is. (thumbs u

 

I wouldn't say he's an auto-contrarian at all. He just does what he thinks is right and just and doesn't always jump on the mob mentality bandwagon. Maybe it's because he's a n00b as am I. However, I have noticed that there are a few people that ONLY contribute negativity and venom and don't spread a lot of positive things. But that's just coming from my n00b eyes, so what do I know?

 

I 100% do agree that HusTrucK is no good and should be on some list, but I think unless Ben/CAHokie nominates him, how could he. None of his shenanigans took place on the Boards. My and nothing else.

 

 

 

 

[Speedy-D]

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=7387367

...and of course, I forgot the poll! It's added now.

[Bosco685]

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=7387367

...and of course, I forgot the poll! It's added now.

 

 

Positive intent counts. You meant to include the poll.