POLL: To add a new rule to the Forum Marketplace 6 6

[shadroch]

On 7/14/2022 at 5:37 PM, onlyweaknesskryptonite said:

Maybe another poll should be started on interpreting polls. 

Or a seminar on how to create them.

[Domo Arigato]

On 7/8/2022 at 9:38 PM, Domo Arigato said:

If any non-poll-creating jabronies have suggestions on how to perfect this one....please send them to me in a PM and I will flush them down the appropriate toilet.

 

[crassus]

On 7/9/2022 at 1:12 PM, shadroch said:

Before you make new rules, think about how to enforce them. 

If a board member sends me books to sell on consignment, that is a deal between them and me. They may not want folks to know they are selling, and I may want people to think I own all these pretty books, not merely sell them for others. How can you possibly force people to tell if they are offering consigned books? What should my penalty be when it is finally revealed I sold a consigned book to a person who was thrilled with the transaction? I've consigned books to people who have sold them on these boards.  People aren't required to say if a book is pressed but you want to force them to say if it is consigned. 

I agree completely. 

I did read through what @Dr. Ballshad to deal with via Clink and the deadbeat seller, and I understand why it raises concerns about transparency in a sales thread generally, but a purchase through the Clink exchange is not comparable to how transactions work in the Boards' marketplace. You may volunteer that the item is "for a friend" or that the item is "on its way back from CGC etc", but it doesn't really matter who owns the book or where the book resides, because the existing rules bind the seller to their obligations notwithstanding any special or undeclared circumstances. At the root of these situations is one main problem, people who cannot or will not honour their commitments and obligations, to me the physical location of the book or its owner are incidental. 

[Domo Arigato]

Poll ends tonight. 

 

[THE_BEYONDER]

On 7/15/2022 at 5:12 PM, Domo Arigato said:

Poll ends tonight. 

 

I’m still trying to figure out why consignments need to be disclosed if the books are in hand....

[Domo Arigato]

On 7/15/2022 at 5:20 PM, THE_BEYONDER said:

I’m still trying to figure out why consignments need to be disclosed if the books are in hand....

No idea.  I just tried to offer options from least restrictive (no new rule) to most restrictive (full disclosure of everything, or no selling if you don't have the book in hand).

Personally, I voted for option #3. I felt this was the best compromise that would allow buyers to make a somewhat informed decision, without being intrusive or restrictive to sellers.  This would also let the buyer know they might want to ask some additional questions about why a book isn't in hand.

It does seem clear that the majority of people want at least some kind of rule regarding this to be added.

If @CGC Mikewants....when this poll is over.......he can use it to decide what he wants to do, if anything.  Which if fine with me, as it requires me to do nothing.   

Or, I could create another poll containing just the top 3 voted new rule suggestions from this poll, and we could see if that produces a clear majority.  This would at least give the people that chose "no new rule needs to be added" a say in how restrictive a potential new rule would be.

As of right now.....that would give a new poll with the following three options for a new rule:

1. Sellers must disclose if a book is on consignment and if they have the book in hand or not.
2. Sellers must disclose when they don't have the book in their possession.
3. Sellers are not allowed to sell books that are not in their possession. 

But this will have to be Mike's call on what he wants to do.

 

Edited July 15, 2022 by Domo Arigato

[CGC Mike]

On 7/15/2022 at 6:56 PM, Domo Arigato said:

If @CGC Mikewants....when this poll is over.......he can use it to decide what he wants to do, if anything.  Which if fine with me, as it requires me to do nothing.   

I will post me decision early tomorrow morning.  I recommend holding off on any new polls until then.

[Dr. Balls]

On 7/15/2022 at 6:28 AM, crassus said:

a purchase through the Clink exchange is not comparable to how transactions work in the Boards' marketplace. You may volunteer that the item is "for a friend" or that the item is "on its way back from CGC etc", but it doesn't really matter who owns the book or where the book resides, because the existing rules bind the seller to their obligations notwithstanding any special or undeclared circumstances.

This is getting into the realm of hypothesis - but, this scenario could have played out here on the boards with an established Board member consigning a book that had already been sold at a different venue. It could have very well caused the same problem with a boardie as it did me. The book made it into a sales thread here on the CGC Boards. Imagine having to sort this out in the Probie discussions? Trying to re-obtain my money? That sounds like a risk everyone is willing to make on the behalf of one poor schmuck who trusted someone to actually have the book they are selling.

It does come down to who's going to follow through or not, rules notwithstanding. My vote is simply stating that if you have a consigned book that isn't in-hand, there are a lot of things that can go wrong within the chain of custody and that a potential buyer should be able to make the determination if he wants to potentially deal with that or not.

Everyone has their own perspective. My perspective is now skewed due to my experience. Why did Omaha list the book for his friend - who is a dealer - why didn't the dealer list the book? Why did Omaha write an 80-word headline on all the books listed in his thread and leave out the most expensive and arguably the most popular book for sale there? These are my doubts to ponder, and I will always have them from now going forward. Not that it's exclusive to comics, I know a whole lot of shady car people, shady record people, and shady pokemon people. I'm just wanting to add the rule to force the shady folks who like bending rules to disclose something that should not be kept from the buyer.

You either have the book in your possession, or you don't. I'm not an established dealer or anything, but I don't fully understand the pushback on making someone state that they either have the book in-hand or do not. A simple "All books are in-hand unless noted" would be a pretty simply solution to put into your sales thread rules.

Edited July 16, 2022 by Dr. Balls

[THE_BEYONDER]

On 7/15/2022 at 8:23 PM, Dr. Balls said:

A simple "All books are in-hand unless noted" would be a pretty simply solution to put into your sales thread rules.

Or we could simply make a rule that requires that the book be in hand before you can sell it.   I’m not sure who these mystery sellers are that would be impacted by such a rule.

 

I’m waiting to hear from them.....

[Domo Arigato]

10 minutes until the poll closes.

 

 

[CGC Mike]

Due to the fact that the majority of board members did not vote in favor of any of the choices, and taking into consideration the posts in this thread, there will be no rule added to the marketplace guidelines at this time.  Just by doing the math in my head,  about 161 people voted, and the most votes for any 1 choice was 54

[shadroch]

On 7/16/2022 at 4:53 AM, CGC Mike said:

Due to the fact that the majority of board members did not vote in favor of any of the choices, and taking into consideration the posts in this thread, there will be no rule added to the marketplace guidelines at this time.  Just by doing the math in my head,  about 161 people voted, and the most votes for any 1 choice was 54

I think every poll should have a smoke crack option. 

What should have been a simple question- Should sellers have a book in hand before it is offered here got convoluted by adding the consignment aspect into it. 

Two very different things. I think a poll that simply asked if a seller should be required to have a book in hand before selling would have given a very different result. 

How a question is asked can easily skew the answer you get back. 

[CGC Mike]

On 7/16/2022 at 9:36 AM, shadroch said:

 

What should have been a simple question- Should sellers have a book in hand before it is offered here got convoluted by adding the consignment aspect into it. 

Two very different things. I think a poll that simply asked if a seller should be required to have a book in hand before selling would have given a very different result. 

How a question is asked can easily skew the answer you get back. 

I agree.  Basically 2 questions which amount to yes or no.  This brings up another point.  Several people have books being shipped back from CGC and have a FS thread for books that are still in the mail.  This rule would require them to wait until they have them in hand.  

Many people think we already have too many rules.  Don't get me wrong.  If the majority of board members want a new rule or change, I am not opposed to the idea.

[THE_BEYONDER]

On 7/16/2022 at 9:59 AM, CGC Mike said:

  Several people have books being shipped back from CGC and have a FS thread for books that are still in the mail.  This rule would require them to wait until they have them in hand.  

 

Which they should 

[shadroch]

Knowing the problems CGC is currently having, I'd be especially leery of buying a book that is on its way back.Far too many newton rings, label mixups ect,ect. 

If someone can show me how that rule would effect their business practices, I'm open to listening. 

[THE_BEYONDER]

On 7/16/2022 at 11:24 AM, shadroch said:

Knowing the problems CGC is currently having, I'd be especially leery of buying a book that is on its way back.Far too many newton rings, label mixups ect,ect. 

If someone can show me how that rule would effect their business practices, I'm open to listening. 

I’ve been waiting for those that would be impacted by such a rule to join the discussion....

[onlyweaknesskryptonite]

The main ones I see a new rule, such as these, impacting would be some of the Signature Series facilitators that do a x/# amount of books that will be 9.8 SS books from signings they have scheduled and are running a pre sale on. 

[Domo Arigato]

On 7/16/2022 at 8:59 AM, CGC Mike said:

On 7/16/2022 at 8:36 AM, shadroch said:

I think every poll should have a smoke crack option. 

What should have been a simple question- Should sellers have a book in hand before it is offered here got convoluted by adding the consignment aspect into it. 

Two very different things. I think a poll that simply asked if a seller should be required to have a book in hand before selling would have given a very different result. 

How a question is asked can easily skew the answer you get back. 

I agree.  Basically 2 questions which amount to yes or no.  This brings up another point.  Several people have books being shipped back from CGC and have a FS thread for books that are still in the mail.  This rule would require them to wait until they have them in hand.  

Many people think we already have too many rules.  Don't get me wrong.  If the majority of board members want a new rule or change, I am not opposed to the idea.

The reason I did it this way, is because the entire reason for the poll was centered around consignors not having the books in hand.  Which is completely different from sellers just waiting for books to come back from CGC.....or as onlyweaknesskryptonite just mentioned, scenarios like those doing pre-sales on signature series books.  ALL of which are very different things.  

I didn't feel a simplistic yes/no poll was the right way to go, and would have steam-rolled over some possibly legitimate reasons for not having a book in hand.  There are thousands of members in here, and every single one of them will likely pull a different answer out of their rectum on how a poll should be done, based on their own opinion/bias on what they want from it.

Only 21% of the voters......34 out of 161....voted that sellers should always have a book in hand before selling it.  If that's the only answer you want.....there you have it. 

But it's not as simple than that.  Most of the other votes (94 out of 161, or nearly 60%) would allow a sale without having the book in hand, but required varying amounts of disclosure.    The choice that got the most votes (54 out of 161), was the one that stated consignments must be disclosed as such and it must be stated if the book is in hand or not.  

The majority of people apparently do want a new rule.  But forcing one either/or option onto them based on what only 21% of the voters apparently want is like cracking an egg with a sledgehammer.  But I invite all of the people who graduated from Perfect Poll Making University to step up to the plate next time.

 

[shadroch]

On 7/16/2022 at 2:09 PM, Domo Arigato said:

The reason I did it this way, is because the entire reason for the poll was centered around consignors not having the books in hand.  Which is completely different from sellers just waiting for books to come back from CGC.....or as onlyweaknesskryptonite just mentioned, scenarios like those doing pre-sales on signature series books.  ALL of which are very different things.  

I didn't feel a simplistic yes/no poll was the right way to go, and would have steam-rolled over some possibly legitimate reasons for not having a book in hand.  There are thousands of members in here, and every single one of them will likely pull a different answer out of their rectum on how a poll should be done, based on their own opinion/bias on what they want from it.

Only 21% of the voters......34 out of 161....voted that sellers should always have a book in hand before selling it.  If that's the only answer you want.....there you have it. 

But it's not as simple than that.  Most of the other votes (94 out of 161, or nearly 60%) would allow a sale without having the book in hand, but required varying amounts of disclosure.    The choice that got the most votes (54 out of 161), was the one that stated consignments must be disclosed as such and it must be stated if the book is in hand or not.  

The majority of people apparently do want a new rule.  But forcing one either/or option onto them based on what only 21% of the voters apparently want is like cracking an egg with a sledgehammer.  But I invite all of the people who graduated from Perfect Poll Making University to step up to the plate next time.

 

First off, thank you for attempting to getting the forums thoughts.  It's a difficult job, not for the weak of heart.  I don't see this as a consignment problem as the book wasn't ever consigned.  The Comic Link Exchange is not a consignment site. That people don't understand this is problematic.  Comic Link is an advertising site where you order books that are advertised on it.  It isn't a consignment site.

I don't know how a consigned book wouldn't be in hand as that is the very definition of consignment.  The owner GIVES the book to someone to sell.  Posting a picture on a website is not consigning the book.

Edited July 16, 2022 by shadroch

[Domo Arigato]

On 7/16/2022 at 4:17 PM, shadroch said:

First off, thank you for attempting to getting the forums thoughts.  It's a difficult job, not for the weak of heart.  I don't see this as a consignment problem as the book wasn't ever consigned.  The Comic Link Exchange is not a consignment site. That people don't understand this is problematic.  Comic Link is an advertising site where you order books that are advertised on it.  It isn't a consignment site.

No worries.  I've just done enough of these polls to know that everyone has their own opinion on how they should be done.......which I understand.  The problem you run into when making a poll, is that each and every one of these opinions tend to be different and in opposition to the next one. 

And I'd have to go back and check the source thread, but I don't think the issue was raised because of the way Comic Link was operating. 

I believe it was because the missing book that Dr.Balls thought he "bought" from Comic Link showed up for sale here on the boards by another member.  Then, when that forum seller was contacted, they said the book wasn't actually theirs and they didn't even have it in their possession.  And when the person who physically had the book was tracked down, it appears that they actually got it in trade from the person who originally had it listed for sale on Comic Link.  So it was just a huge mess that spilled over into the Forum Marketplace.

I personally wouldn't mind a rule that stated sellers in here must have the books in their possession.  But, as the poll went on, people were bringing up possible scenarios (such as pre-sales for signings) where there could be a legitimate reason that this might not be the best option.  This is why I waited until late in the poll to cast my vote, as my stance had softened a bit.  It's why I chose option 3 as what I felt might be the best compromise.......that regardless of reason, if a seller doesn't have the book in hand, they must disclose that fact.  This would at least provide some disclosure to prompt a potential buyer to ask additional questions or proceed at their own risk.  

Or, maybe just go with the rule that books must be in a sellers possession, with an exemption allowed for pre-sales?  Who knows?  I was just trying to offer alternative options that wouldn't interfere with legitimate sellers, while still alerting buyers to potential areas of concern. 

 

Edited July 16, 2022 by Domo Arigato