-1s in the transaction forum you get banned from PMs and Classifieds

[Fenway]

Or maybe just flat out banned.

I'm getting tired of reading about people getting jacked in the classifieds. I'm thinking about setting it up so that if you get a -1 and don't provide a good answer as to what happened you get banned from the classifieds and you can no longer send Private Messages.

Thoughts?

 

[JcJ]

I think that would be letting the scumbags off easy.. imho..

 

[indyjoe]

I see the negative marking as a warning. However, I might like to try to buy something from someone that made a bad choice and learned from it. However, with multiple or a seriously unexplained -1 might be enough.

 

[Don]

Sounds like a fair deal to me.

 

[VUPDblue]

Or maybe just flat out banned.

I'm getting tired of reading about people getting jacked in the classifieds. I'm thinking about setting it up so that if you get a -1 and don't provide a good answer as to what happened you get banned from the classifieds and you can no longer send Private Messages.

Thoughts?

I think a banning of any sort based solely on a single -1 is a bit harsh. There are 2 sides to every story, and I think that banning should be based on the merit of the situation as a whole. Heck, I might be inclined to leave someone a -1 just because I thought he was ugly. He shouldn't be banned for that. The problem with babysitting a clasifieds forum is just that, it needs a babysitter.

 

[esrice]

You don't see many -1s on the forum, but when you do they're normally not good.

lovemywoods and I have both been burned on here. That doesn't mean we don't continue to work with others on here-- we just avoid the -1 folks.

Maybe pulling their PMs would work. Then onto banning.

 

[abnk]

Here are my thoughts:

1. Both sides tell their side of the story.
2. A jury composed of moderators will rule whether the violation is deserving of a -1.
3. Fenway issues the punishment according to the severity of the violation. Flagrant violations mean complete ban of the IP address. Less harmful violations mean ban from PMs and classifieds.

 

[ashylarry]

I dont think you can take their PM's cause then they couldnt PM a moderator in case something came up.

But I would say ban them from the classifieds completely. They messed up and they shouldn't be able to buy/sell/trade. Then if they mess up again

 

[Ri22o]

Maybe look into a Trader Feedback system? Similar to this one on NASIOC.

NASIOC

 

[Fenway]

must be a register to view? I'm going to look into a VB mod "iTrader" I've seen it used on other boards

 

[Ri22o]

must be a register to view? I'm going to look into a VB mod "iTrader" I've seen it used on other boards

I'm always logged in, so I didn't realize.

That's what they use. Seems to be a good system.

 

[lovemywoods]

Caution

Fenway,

Here is a dilemma...If you impose a hard and fast rule, then little judgment is needed, but the details of a case are lost and the outcome could be unfair (ex. 'zero tolerance policies in schools'). On the other hand, if a complicated process of presenting both sides of a situation is instituted, then you are placed in the judge's seat. Do you have the time and desire to get into endless 'he said..he said...blah...blah...blah' types of arguments.

I appreciate all that you do to make this forum possible and I realize that I participate in it by your good will.

I suggest you or your appointed moderator be given broad leeway to monitor situations and if there are repeated violations or a single incident of particular severity, then you pull PM rights or Classifieds access or site access. It would be up to you.

lovemywoods

 

[Bill of Rights]

Fenway,

Here is a dilemma...If you impose a hard and fast rule, then little judgment is needed, but the details of a case are lost and the outcome could be unfair (ex. 'zero tolerance policies in schools'). On the other hand, if a complicated process of presenting both sides of a situation is instituted, then you are placed in the judge's seat. Do you have the time and desire to get into endless 'he said..he said...blah...blah...blah' types of arguments.

I appreciate all that you do to make this forum possible and I realize that I participate in it by your good will.

I suggest you or your appointed moderator be given broad leeway to monitor situations and if there are repeated violations or a single incident of particular severity, then you pull PM rights or Classifieds access or site access. It would be up to you.

lovemywoods

Ditto. I don't do much in the classifieds (mostly read, actually).
I'd think that the color system for names could be used also-after a fair jury (mods, with Fenway as judge; alternately mods with Lars as judge, Fenway as an appeal) reviews both sides' stories, a name can be marked in bright red for a negative "sales rep" or bright green for a positive "sales rep". Let the buyer be forewarned and make their own decision. If a person gets some predetermined number of negative sales rep, perhaps THEN ban them from Classifieds, but honestly, I think the market can pretty much "police" itself. I know that if I saw someone's name in bright red, I'd definitely go into any transaction with my eyes wide open if I pursued it at all.

The bottom line is that it's not Fenway's or Lars' or any mod's responsibility to ensure no one gets burned.

Blessings,
B

 

[Crystalship1]

must be a register to view? I'm going to look into a VB mod "iTrader" I've seen it used on other boards

There 'ya go!!! Let the buyer's and sellers have a rating similar to eBay!!! It's not perfect but if you're on the up and up, chances are you'll fair well.

 

[Soundslikejosh]

Ditto. I don't do much in the classifieds (mostly read, actually).
I'd think that the color system for names could be used also-after a fair jury (mods, with Fenway as judge; alternately mods with Lars as judge, Fenway as an appeal) reviews both sides' stories, a name can be marked in bright red for a negative "sales rep" or bright green for a positive "sales rep". Let the buyer be forewarned and make their own decision. If a person gets some predetermined number of negative sales rep, perhaps THEN ban them from Classifieds, but honestly, I think the market can pretty much "police" itself. I know that if I saw someone's name in bright red, I'd definitely go into any transaction with my eyes wide open if I pursued it at all.

The bottom line is that it's not Fenway's or Lars' or any mod's responsibility to ensure no one gets burned.

Blessings,
B

I understand that Fenway wants to limit the number of people who get burned in the classifieds, but as some of the threads have shown, its not alway clear what a burn is. Some disagreements aren't that clear cut, and what pisses off one would-be-buyer, might seem fair to a handful of future sellers. Just . As has been said, those who read the classifieds know who the jokers are, and wouldn't do business with them. As always, buyer beware. If you are willing to buy from someone who you do not know and have never met in person, you better be doing a search to look for their posts and previous transactions.

I appreciate Fenway's desire to keep the boards clean, but I must agree with Bill of Rights that the thing can/will/should police itself. Fenway, Lars, etc have plenty to do as it is.

 

[Hiram Abiff]

I'd think that the color system for names could be used also-after a fair jury (mods, with Fenway as judge; alternately mods with Lars as judge, Fenway as an appeal) reviews both sides' stories, a name can be marked in bright red for a negative "sales rep" or bright green for a positive "sales rep". Let the buyer be forewarned and make their own decision. If a person gets some predetermined number of negative sales rep, perhaps THEN ban them from Classifieds, but honestly, I think the market can pretty much "police" itself. I know that if I saw someone's name in bright red, I'd definitely go into any transaction with my eyes wide open if I pursued it at all.

The bottom line is that it's not Fenway's or Lars' or any mod's responsibility to ensure no one gets burned.

Blessings,
B

I agree but then just my

 

[Ri22o]

This is a little different, but I don't like it when you take the time to post a review for a fellow member that you had a transaction with, and they don't do the same for you.

 

[ashylarry]

This is a little different, but I don't like it when you take the time to post a review for a fellow member that you had a transaction with, and they don't do the same for you.

yah same here.

 

[Mini-14]

Say you ban somone or they get alot of negative's. What's stopping them from comming back using a different user name?

 

[4sarge]

-1 for members

This is a little different, but I don't like it when you take the time to post a review for a fellow member that you had a transaction with, and they don't do the same for you.

Me too, but that happens a lot on Ebay.:rolleyesedit:

I'm normally a buyer Not a seller but my feelings are:

Most people (long time ) here are honest and would not intentionally attempt to mislead (screw) you.

If you have a FIRM will not go any lower price then post it as such or do not be offended if someone offers you a little less. Most people (me included, think that their items are worth more than the market will bare)

Unless it is a FFL, Mail/shipping transaction the buyer has examined the item at a FTF transaction so days later buyer remorse is probably not valid. I realize that there could be exceptions, IE firearm fails to function etc. That is why I prefer a FTF transaction.

Personal pet peeves are:

after a deal is confirmed selling to someone else for 5 dollars more

Not keeping in contact - I usually give my TX number & e-mail

Not making a confirmed FTF meeting and Not calling to reschedule before you have driven to the meeting sight.

someone sniping a good deal and that is their only post ever or interaction in the forum or by dealers buying up the good buys from us regular forumites.

I'm sure that I have more but I'm tired of typing