General discussion thread - keep the other threads clean 29 29

[Bosco685]

[JAM_NYC]

I was not surprised to see that almost 40% of the votes in that poll support potential scammers smh...

 

Can I ask on what basis you assume that a "no" vote equals support for scammers? You're just kidding, right?

 

Not kidding

 

Who wouldn't want to try to make the boards a better/safer place for sales by implementing some tighter rules with all the NOOB sellers/buyers around here in the past few months who can't take the time to read the rules of the forums, or try to scam someone out of money. Maybe giving a grace period to these new people will allow for the proper time to learn some board etiquette before buying/selling?

 

Also, adding a waiting period for new sellers who are trying to scam may eventually drive them away from here because they don't want to wait weeks to be able to sell since they are looking for the quick $$$ from those people who are caught off guard. It also forces them to interact on the boards by having a post count and gives the rest of the community a chance to get a feel of who the boardie is before deciding to buy from them when they have 1 post.

 

So having a different opinion means I support scammers?

 

How about looking at it this way.

 

Someone who BUYS from someone with 1 post might be supporting a scammer.

 

Someone who posts with one post might be an honest seller.

 

Someone who buys with one post without spending time to check out the boards might be a gambler.

 

You can change the "one" to "200" if it helps you.

 

Someone who reacts to how others vote with such a strong reaction might be over-reacting a tiny bit?

 

I'll stand by my first suggestion last night. We should not allow anyone to post until they have been here for 2 years. Makes as much sense as some of this other stuff, and it's MUCH more likely to protect new people from their own enthusiasm.

 

(yes, I'm joking about the 2 years, but think about the consequences;)

 

 

Let me clear this up, No I don't think everyone supports scammers who voted no, it was more of a smart way of saying that it comes across to me like 40% of people don't think there is a problem in the sales forums. I know I've been deterred from selling or buying from a lot of people because of the increase in sketchy sales threads on here in the past few months.

 

So when a sales thread has looked sketchy, you just didn't make a purchase. Seems like this problem has solved itself.

[Speedy-D]

I was not surprised to see that almost 40% of the votes in that poll support potential scammers smh...

 

Can I ask on what basis you assume that a "no" vote equals support for scammers? You're just kidding, right?

 

Not kidding

 

Who wouldn't want to try to make the boards a better/safer place for sales by implementing some tighter rules with all the NOOB sellers/buyers around here in the past few months who can't take the time to read the rules of the forums, or try to scam someone out of money. Maybe giving a grace period to these new people will allow for the proper time to learn some board etiquette before buying/selling?

 

Also, adding a waiting period for new sellers who are trying to scam may eventually drive them away from here because they don't want to wait weeks to be able to sell since they are looking for the quick $$$ from those people who are caught off guard. It also forces them to interact on the boards by having a post count and gives the rest of the community a chance to get a feel of who the boardie is before deciding to buy from them when they have 1 post.

 

So having a different opinion means I support scammers?

 

How about looking at it this way.

 

Someone who BUYS from someone with 1 post might be supporting a scammer.

 

Someone who posts with one post might be an honest seller.

 

Someone who buys with one post without spending time to check out the boards might be a gambler.

 

You can change the "one" to "200" if it helps you.

 

Someone who reacts to how others vote with such a strong reaction might be over-reacting a tiny bit?

 

I'll stand by my first suggestion last night. We should not allow anyone to post until they have been here for 2 years. Makes as much sense as some of this other stuff, and it's MUCH more likely to protect new people from their own enthusiasm.

 

(yes, I'm joking about the 2 years, but think about the consequences;)

 

 

Let me clear this up, No I don't think everyone supports scammers who voted no, it was more of a smart way of saying that it comes across to me like 40% of people don't think there is a problem in the sales forums. I know I've been deterred from selling or buying from a lot of people because of the increase in sketchy sales threads on here in the past few months.

 

So when a sales thread has looked sketchy, you just didn't make a purchase. Seems like this problem has solved itself.

*sigh* Not bullseye, but what's the diff?

[Bosco685]

Wowser!

 

 

 

 

I bet some international cover collect would love to have this one. Classic!

 

[JAM_NYC]

I was not surprised to see that almost 40% of the votes in that poll support potential scammers smh...

 

Can I ask on what basis you assume that a "no" vote equals support for scammers? You're just kidding, right?

 

Not kidding

 

Who wouldn't want to try to make the boards a better/safer place for sales by implementing some tighter rules with all the NOOB sellers/buyers around here in the past few months who can't take the time to read the rules of the forums, or try to scam someone out of money. Maybe giving a grace period to these new people will allow for the proper time to learn some board etiquette before buying/selling?

 

Also, adding a waiting period for new sellers who are trying to scam may eventually drive them away from here because they don't want to wait weeks to be able to sell since they are looking for the quick $$$ from those people who are caught off guard. It also forces them to interact on the boards by having a post count and gives the rest of the community a chance to get a feel of who the boardie is before deciding to buy from them when they have 1 post.

 

So having a different opinion means I support scammers?

 

How about looking at it this way.

 

Someone who BUYS from someone with 1 post might be supporting a scammer.

 

Someone who posts with one post might be an honest seller.

 

Someone who buys with one post without spending time to check out the boards might be a gambler.

 

You can change the "one" to "200" if it helps you.

 

Someone who reacts to how others vote with such a strong reaction might be over-reacting a tiny bit?

 

I'll stand by my first suggestion last night. We should not allow anyone to post until they have been here for 2 years. Makes as much sense as some of this other stuff, and it's MUCH more likely to protect new people from their own enthusiasm.

 

(yes, I'm joking about the 2 years, but think about the consequences;)

 

 

Let me clear this up, No I don't think everyone supports scammers who voted no, it was more of a smart way of saying that it comes across to me like 40% of people don't think there is a problem in the sales forums. I know I've been deterred from selling or buying from a lot of people because of the increase in sketchy sales threads on here in the past few months.

 

So when a sales thread has looked sketchy, you just didn't make a purchase. Seems like this problem has solved itself.

*sigh* Not bullseye, but what's the diff?

Explain please. Gently.

Most of us recognize that a guy with 2 posts selling keys for well under FMV is probably a scammer. There's money to be made selling comics, and where there's money changing hands, there's going to be scammers. No system is going to be 100%. You yourself have said that you've seen stuff like this discussed over and over again, and nothing ever changes.

 

Paraphrasing what Sharon said earlier, there's only so much you can do to protect people from themselves. There's always going to be thieves showing up here, and there's always going to be some poor boardie that takes the bait. Some of you seem convinced that rocking the boat too much might cause the sales forum to go bye-bye, and that would be a real shame, IMHO.

 

[Speedy-D]

Gently:

 

I know I've been deterred from selling or buying from a lot of people because of the increase in sketchy sales threads on here in the past few months.

So when a sales thread has looked sketchy, you just didn't make a purchase.

First quote: Due to the increase of "sketchy sales threads," I do a lot less buying and selling from threads in general.

 

Second quote: I don't buy from sketchy threads.

 

If you want to take A.Romeo's post, in which he is trying to point out a negative consequence of sketchy threads beyond the immediate threat of getting ripped of in those threads, and turn it into evidence that everything's great, then we will indeed keep hashing out the same three silly points ad infinitum.

 

Dig?

[Jimmy Linguini]

the guy accepted my $300 offer and I didn't want to be put on the PL

[HighRadArt]

the guy accepted my $300 offer and I didn't want to be put on the PL

 

Has the book arrived yet?

[Jimmy Linguini]

the guy accepted my $300 offer and I didn't want to be put on the PL

 

Has the book arrived yet?

 

 

(he also created a shill account and sold another book to a different boardie)

[slym2none]

Some of you seem convinced that rocking the boat too much might cause the sales forum to go bye-bye, and that would be a real shame, IMHO.

 

Convinced? No.

 

Aware that shutting the B/S/T threads down is easy if too many headaches arise and it makes no difference to the parent company running the site, as has been done other places (setting a precedent) ?? Yes.

 

 

 

-slym

[JAM_NYC]

Gently:

 

I know I've been deterred from selling or buying from a lot of people because of the increase in sketchy sales threads on here in the past few months.

So when a sales thread has looked sketchy, you just didn't make a purchase.

First quote: Due to the increase of "sketchy sales threads," I do a lot less buying and selling from threads in general.

 

Second quote: I don't buy from sketchy threads.

 

If you want to take A.Romeo's post, in which he is trying to point out a negative consequence of sketchy threads beyond the immediate threat of getting ripped of in those threads, and turn it into evidence that everything's great, then we will indeed keep hashing out the same three silly points ad infinitum.

 

Dig?

I'm far too much of a negative Nancy to ever think everything's great. I think some folks affinity for this place blinds them to the fact that the marketplace here is subject to the same dooshnozzles that show up on eBay, Craigslist, etc. Some people here SHOULD be more careful and learn some self-control.

 

That's not to say that there's no room for improvement in the marketplace. I would just hate to penalize new members on the off-chance that they're scammers. I'm still trying to figure out why a HOS member is not only still allowed to participate on these forums, but continue to sell stuff here with no repercussions. And why other members can buy stuff from a HOS member with no repercussions. And why said HOS member can come in here and mock us, the rules, and his punishment with no repercussions.

[Ryan.]

Gently:

 

I know I've been deterred from selling or buying from a lot of people because of the increase in sketchy sales threads on here in the past few months.

So when a sales thread has looked sketchy, you just didn't make a purchase.

First quote: Due to the increase of "sketchy sales threads," I do a lot less buying and selling from threads in general.

 

Second quote: I don't buy from sketchy threads.

 

If you want to take A.Romeo's post, in which he is trying to point out a negative consequence of sketchy threads beyond the immediate threat of getting ripped of in those threads, and turn it into evidence that everything's great, then we will indeed keep hashing out the same three silly points ad infinitum.

 

Dig?

 

This isn't a zero sum game; i.e. there are more sketchy sales threads, therefore I will be doing less total buying. When someone sells a book that interests me I use the same internal vetting process to determine if the seller is likely to be on the up-and-up that I have always done, whether that be here, on ebay, at a convention or wherever. I don't know if there really has been more scammers now than there ever were but those threads stick out like a sore thumb and are fairly easy to scroll past.

 

Also, there are plenty of these so-called "trusted, veteran" board members that have used their status to become negligent in their followthrough when it comes to sales, either through poor communication, extremely slow shipping, or inflating prices for less-experienced collectors. Length of membership is hardly an indicator of virtue.

 

Either way I'm fairly agnostic about implementing more rules. If that's what everyone wants then go for it. My purchasing behavior will be more or less the same.

[Speedy-D]

Gently:

 

I know I've been deterred from selling or buying from a lot of people because of the increase in sketchy sales threads on here in the past few months.

So when a sales thread has looked sketchy, you just didn't make a purchase.

First quote: Due to the increase of "sketchy sales threads," I do a lot less buying and selling from threads in general.

 

Second quote: I don't buy from sketchy threads.

 

If you want to take A.Romeo's post, in which he is trying to point out a negative consequence of sketchy threads beyond the immediate threat of getting ripped of in those threads, and turn it into evidence that everything's great, then we will indeed keep hashing out the same three silly points ad infinitum.

 

Dig?

I'm far too much of a negative Nancy to ever think everything's great. I think some folks affinity for this place blinds them to the fact that the marketplace here is subject to the same dooshnozzles that show up on eBay, Craigslist, etc. Some people here SHOULD be more careful and learn some self-control.

 

That's not to say that there's no room for improvement in the marketplace. I would just hate to penalize new members on the off-chance that they're scammers. I'm still trying to figure out why a HOS member is not only still allowed to participate on these forums, but continue to sell stuff here with no repercussions. And why other members can buy stuff from a HOS member with no repercussions. And why said HOS member can come in here and mock us, the rules, and his punishment with no repercussions.

Okay, awesome, you have a real opinion on the matter. That's good to know. But you can see how

 

 

can just kill discussion. All it does is mischaracterize what A.Romeo was saying and serve to shut him up. Where's the benefit of that?

[Speedy-D]

As I see it, there are five arguments against this notion, that we keep hearing repeat:

 

1. Things are fine. People are blowing a couple bad apples way out of proportion.

 

2. People should use a little common sense. If they weren't such greedy schmucks they'd be able to realize that an Action 1 at 9% FMV from a noob with three posts is a scam.

 

3. There is a problem, but implementing this (or maybe any) solution will unduly burden the good noobs.

 

3a. When I was a noob I was good, so...

 

4. Not all problem Boardies are noobs, and not all noobs are problem Boardies.

5. Dude, be quiet. If we wake the sleeping Arch, he'll take away our sales threads!!!

 

I'm not counting 3a. as a separate argument, 'cuz it's basically just an anecdotal version of 3.

 

Does that sound right?

[JAM_NYC]

Gently:

 

I know I've been deterred from selling or buying from a lot of people because of the increase in sketchy sales threads on here in the past few months.

So when a sales thread has looked sketchy, you just didn't make a purchase.

First quote: Due to the increase of "sketchy sales threads," I do a lot less buying and selling from threads in general.

 

Second quote: I don't buy from sketchy threads.

 

If you want to take A.Romeo's post, in which he is trying to point out a negative consequence of sketchy threads beyond the immediate threat of getting ripped of in those threads, and turn it into evidence that everything's great, then we will indeed keep hashing out the same three silly points ad infinitum.

 

Dig?

I'm far too much of a negative Nancy to ever think everything's great. I think some folks affinity for this place blinds them to the fact that the marketplace here is subject to the same dooshnozzles that show up on eBay, Craigslist, etc. Some people here SHOULD be more careful and learn some self-control.

 

That's not to say that there's no room for improvement in the marketplace. I would just hate to penalize new members on the off-chance that they're scammers. I'm still trying to figure out why a HOS member is not only still allowed to participate on these forums, but continue to sell stuff here with no repercussions. And why other members can buy stuff from a HOS member with no repercussions. And why said HOS member can come in here and mock us, the rules, and his punishment with no repercussions.

Okay, awesome, you have a real opinion on the matter. That's good to know. But you can see how

 

 

can just kill discussion. All it does is mischaracterize what A.Romeo was saying and serve to shut him up. Where's the benefit of that?

Not sure where you're getting all of that from? All I was doing was agreeing with Ryan's response. I figured rather than answer with a boring "good point, I agree", I tried to add some levity by posting a pic. Because his name is Bullseye. And he's giving a 'hey, right on guy' finger point. I'm not saying its A+ material, I'm still half asleep.

 

And I gave my opinion on the subject in your thread, after I voted nay. The only reason I repeat it here is because A Romeo mischaracterized ME by saying my vote of no in your poll means I support scammers. I'm not trying to be argumentative here, just wanted to throw my in to the discussion, which I thought was the point of all this. To gauge the membership on their feelings on the topic.

[JAM_NYC]

Gently:

 

I know I've been deterred from selling or buying from a lot of people because of the increase in sketchy sales threads on here in the past few months.

So when a sales thread has looked sketchy, you just didn't make a purchase.

First quote: Due to the increase of "sketchy sales threads," I do a lot less buying and selling from threads in general.

 

Second quote: I don't buy from sketchy threads.

 

If you want to take A.Romeo's post, in which he is trying to point out a negative consequence of sketchy threads beyond the immediate threat of getting ripped of in those threads, and turn it into evidence that everything's great, then we will indeed keep hashing out the same three silly points ad infinitum.

 

Dig?

 

This isn't a zero sum game; i.e. there are more sketchy sales threads, therefore I will be doing less total buying. When someone sells a book that interests me I use the same internal vetting process to determine if the seller is likely to be on the up-and-up that I have always done, whether that be here, on ebay, at a convention or wherever. I don't know if there really has been more scammers now than there ever were but those threads stick out like a sore thumb and are fairly easy to scroll past.

 

Also, there are plenty of these so-called "trusted, veteran" board members that have used their status to become negligent in their followthrough when it comes to sales, either through poor communication, extremely slow shipping, or inflating prices for less-experienced collectors. Length of membership is hardly an indicator of virtue.

 

Either way I'm fairly agnostic about implementing more rules. If that's what everyone wants then go for it. My purchasing behavior will be more or less the same.

 

[JAM_NYC]

As I see it, there are five arguments against this notion, that we keep hearing repeat:

 

1. Things are fine. People are blowing a couple bad apples way out of proportion.

 

2. People should use a little common sense. If they weren't such greedy schmucks they'd be able to realize that an Action 1 at 9% FMV from a noob with three posts is a scam.

 

3. There is a problem, but implementing this (or maybe any) solution will unduly burden the good noobs.

 

3a. When I was a noob I was good, so...

 

4. Not all problem Boardies are noobs, and not all noobs are problem Boardies.

5. Dude, be quiet. If we wake the sleeping Arch, he'll take away our sales threads!!!

 

I'm not counting 3a. as a separate argument, 'cuz it's basically just an anecdotal version of 3.

 

Does that sound right?

That sounds spot on.

[HarveySwick]

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=7391948#Post7391948

 

At this point, can you really even call it that?

[EC ed]

As I see it, there are five arguments against this notion, that we keep hearing repeat:

 

1. Things are fine. People are blowing a couple bad apples way out of proportion.

 

2. People should use a little common sense. If they weren't such greedy schmucks they'd be able to realize that an Action 1 at 9% FMV from a noob with three posts is a scam.

 

3. There is a problem, but implementing this (or maybe any) solution will unduly burden the good noobs.

 

3a. When I was a noob I was good, so...

 

4. Not all problem Boardies are noobs, and not all noobs are problem Boardies.

5. Dude, be quiet. If we wake the sleeping Arch, he'll take away our sales threads!!!

 

I'm not counting 3a. as a separate argument, 'cuz it's basically just an anecdotal version of 3.

 

Does that sound right?

 

As written, these are arguments against the general notion of imposing some type of restriction on noob seller/buyers. There are also arguments out there against the specific "post count/membership time" restriction mechanism (not necessarily "my" arguments, mind you, just ones I've seen):

 

6. To a scammer with a little patience, the membership time/post count is not much of an impediment. They can simply register, wait out the two months (all the while posting dancing bananas everywhere), then start hitting it under false cover of "meeting the requirements, so they must be OK."

 

7. A boardie's membership time/post count information is readily visible on every post...even more obvious than the PL...so it's hard to argue the need for further policing of that issue, given the relatively obvious nature of the information.

[skypinkblu]

And why said HOS member can come in here and mock us, the rules, and his punishment with no repercussions.

 

I find it frustrating as well, but remember that WE put people in the HOS, not the Mods. We don't chose who is banned.

 

I've seen HOS members banned when there was a threat involved, when there was a specific issue such as shills, but unless you can find one of those issues, just plain market place misbehavior does not cut it.

 

I think if you take Arch's rule in the context of...they are NOT going to Police the forum, you may see a better picture.The HOS is all us, not them.

 

I was tempted to ask SolarCadet why he'd start a sales thread when he's out of town, but I would hate to keep bumping his thread.

 

Asking him questions, just puts him on the top. If you let him bump the thread himself too often, we'd have a legitimate complaint about the thread.