USAGE GUIDELINES - comment thread 3 3

[CAP Freak]

Not wishing to p!ss on anyone's bonfire, but I'd rather we didn't turn into eBay-lite around here. There seem to be a number of sales threads recently headlined by versions on the 'LQQK!!! MUST SEE!!!! KEYS!!!! GEM MINTS!!!!'

 

Could we not simply state the type of books, maybe titles, the grade range, and whether they're priced under Guide/discounted/new prices?

 

If I'm wrong, tell me...

 

I agree (thumbs u

 

I second that.

[divad]

Note to Arch: Warnings should be given to posters whose comments on a sales thread are based solely on the prices set by the seller. Repeat offenders should receive strikes. It used to be a matter of etiquette around here . . .

 

Generally a good idea. But don't forget there's always a newbie posting his VG SA books at full guide that need a little about pricing.

 

 

And that would be recognized by anyone . . .

[cd4ever]

Note to Arch: Warnings should be given to posters whose comments on a sales thread are based solely on the prices set by the seller. Repeat offenders should receive strikes. It used to be a matter of etiquette around here . . .

 

[joe_collector]

I thought we decided this earlier, but apparently not:

 

To eliminate any multiple browser/quick reply BS, could we please put in an addendum that states the prospective buyer's post must either a) quote the book in question or b) link to the original post that the book was offered in.

 

We had a problem in a previous thread of Nic's whereby some buyers were abusing the "Quick Reply" function in order to be there first, linking to older posts and then editing them later. By eliminating this loophole, and requiring either a scan quote or direct referral to the originating for-sale post, we will create a better selling environment and have much fewer disputes.

 

Thank you.

[Anfield Fox]

Did the mods delete herc's thread?

[divad]

I thought we decided this earlier, but apparently not:

 

To eliminate any multiple browser/quick reply BS, could we please put in an addendum that states the prospective buyer's post must either a) quote the book in question or b) link to the original post that the book was offered in.

 

We had a problem in a previous thread of Nic's whereby some buyers were abusing the "Quick Reply" function in order to be there first, linking to older posts and then editing them later. By eliminating this loophole, and requiring either a scan quote or direct referral to the originating for-sale post, we will create a better selling environment and have much fewer disputes.

 

Thank you.

 

I second this motion, as it has raised uncomfortable issues regarding claims in multiple sales threads.

 

I would even take it one step further, and ask that the use of quick reply in response to sales threads be prohibited . . . Aces will never win a book at 56K

[divad]

Did the mods delete herc's thread?

 

Yes, gratefully. He'll be back when he gets his act together . . . that is, after the Donut fleeces him by PM from the beach

[divad]

Darn . . . . I really wanted those ANS PB's

[divad]

Is it me? Or is there a lot of shinola for sale lately . . .

[Dick Pontoon]

You must've missed last weekend. And the weekend before.

 

Maybe you should step up to the plate with some fresh tomatoes.

[divad]

Well, it appears to have gone to the dogs . . . or the inmates are now running the asylum.

 

Your choice. No polls necessary.

 

 

[awe4one]

I gotta comment...unlock the original FORUM PROBATION THREAD. If you have a problem with some of the posts then deal with the posters but don't take the entirely lazy way out and lock a very productive thread.

 

MODS...your increasingly big stick hit the wrong target this time...

 

Jim

[divad]

What the hell is going on around here?

 

[joe_collector]

Once again I will bring this up, as this is starting to rear its ugly head:

 

I thought we decided this earlier, but apparently not:

 

To eliminate any multiple browser/quick reply BS, could we please put in an addendum that states the prospective buyer's post must either a) quote the book in question or b) link to the original post that the book was offered in.

 

We had a problem in a previous thread of Nic's whereby some buyers were abusing the "Quick Reply" function in order to be there first, linking to older posts and then editing them later. By eliminating this loophole, and requiring either a scan quote or direct referral to the originating for-sale post, we will create a better selling environment and have much fewer disputes.

 

Thank you.

[Transplant]

Yeah this was my first thought when I saw the loner in that sales thread. If it's not a rule, it should be for two reasons:

1) Prevents quick reply instead of replying to the actual sale post.

2) Makes it clear, for later disputes, the book that sold, the condition, the price, etc.

 

As a bonus, it helps other tell what is gone when the seller hasn't had a chance to update yet.

 

I . . . . agree . . . . with JC.?!

[Aces]

Yeah this was my first thought when I saw the loner in that sales thread. If it's not a rule, it should be for two reasons:

1) Prevents quick reply instead of replying to the actual sale post.

2) Makes it clear, for later disputes, the book that sold, the condition, the price, etc.

 

As a bonus, it helps other tell what is gone when the seller hasn't had a chance to update yet.

 

I . . . . agree . . . . with JC.?!

 

Yes.

It's the cleanest way to .

No confusion.

[divad]

There are certain members who do nothing but quick reply

 

 

[BrianR]

I think all sales threads should start around 4:00pm west coast time so as not to be bias towards people on the east coast and everyone has a shot at the books. lol

Edited November 17, 2007 by comicjunkie

[Paratrooper]

Put a ten minute delay on my comments for admin review. Someone needs to censor me.

[BrianR]

Is that because of my joke statement?