Is there a list of people to avoid buying/selling to here?
If you have to ask, you probably shouldn't trust too many people.
I don't wish to speak out publicly against people, but ask around and people will say a lot more in private.
I know before, witch hunting (or even shaming) is not allowed on GH. There are many people who are getting away with it. (because there's no Report a Scammer section) or anything.
I still don’t understand why GH don’t stickied a list of people who had scammed before. That would surely helped new and old people a lot more. Now I had to be wary of even vendor status, sigh.
Agreed, I just don't think GH can maintain a policy of "hands-off" with scamming. I'm not saying they need to like take responsibility for anything, but as you said, maybe a little list of people who are agreed upon as scammers by multiple accounts would be nice.
I am personally a fan of having a good feedback system of some sort. The No Shaming rule was implemented before I became a mod, and any proposed changes were overruled. I don't know if we will be successful in implementing something of this sort, but again, I am in favor of it.
There are a lot of rumors/hearsay that end up floating around behind closed doors anyway, and not everyone is privy to information, and maybe it's not even good info - a public thread(s) to discuss would help, IMO.
I am personally a fan of having a good feedback system of some sort. The No Shaming rule was implemented before I became a mod, and any proposed changes were overruled. I don't know if we will be successful in implementing something of this sort, but again, I am in favor of it.
There are a lot of rumors/hearsay that end up floating around behind closed doors anyway, and not everyone is privy to information, and maybe it's not even good info - a public thread(s) to discuss would help, IMO.
:thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb:
Every forum I'm on (outside of GH) has a Feedback thread, makes it easy to search the username before you do a transaction.
If GH is going to keep a Classifieds section, it only makes sense to add a Feedback thread.
These are happy thumbs:
:thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb:
I am personally a fan of having a good feedback system of some sort. The No Shaming rule was implemented before I became a mod, and any proposed changes were overruled. I don't know if we will be successful in implementing something of this sort, but again, I am in favor of it.
There are a lot of rumors/hearsay that end up floating around behind closed doors anyway, and not everyone is privy to information, and maybe it's not even good info - a public thread(s) to discuss would help, IMO.
:thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb:
Every forum I'm on (outside of GH) has a Feedback thread, makes it easy to search the username before you do a transaction.
If GH is going to keep a Classifieds section, it only makes sense to add a Feedback thread.
These are happy thumbs:
:thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb:
We should have sad thumbs.
I am personally a fan of having a good feedback system of some sort. The No Shaming rule was implemented before I became a mod, and any proposed changes were overruled. I don't know if we will be successful in implementing something of this sort, but again, I am in favor of it.
There are a lot of rumors/hearsay that end up floating around behind closed doors anyway, and not everyone is privy to information, and maybe it's not even good info - a public thread(s) to discuss would help, IMO.
:thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb:
Every forum I'm on (outside of GH) has a Feedback thread, makes it easy to search the username before you do a transaction.
If GH is going to keep a Classifieds section, it only makes sense to add a Feedback thread.
These are happy thumbs:
:thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb:
We should have sad thumbs.
You keep your witchcraft to yourself.... pal. :)
Show Image(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-2tJsLx9hB8s/Um4nHM_pp6I/AAAAAAAABy0/1r9jsTNPxV0/s1600/Borat-838461.jpg)
I agree with everything in this post.Show Image(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-2tJsLx9hB8s/Um4nHM_pp6I/AAAAAAAABy0/1r9jsTNPxV0/s1600/Borat-838461.jpg)
This thread brings up some interesting things though. I mean, it definitely seems like Seth is behind. But there are a lot of vendors that are much further behind, and hardly give updates either or do an update with some promise that isn't kept. In some other vending threads people seem totally fine with how long things take, even encourage the vendors to take all the time they want. Like here, I often feel like some displeased people are often afraid to speak up as well, which if done correctly shouldn't be looked down upon. There definitely isnt a consistent level of judgement or accountability by the users for all the vendors, its quite uneven honestly.
I know that each form of feedback system has its issues, and cant be abused as well. Obviously the thing to avoid is people hating a vendor, and just downvoting everything. Votes should probably be annon. and limited to 1 for each buy. Finding a way to let each buyer leave a 1-10 rating on different aspects of the buy (quality, product came as described, overall experience, whatever) without any additional text, and showing the results somewhere on the vendors page would be nice.
Also, I don't think it would be bad to add something like "at least one update is needed per week for running buys" would be good. A lot of the issue with these buys is not that vendors are being malicious, its the silence and lack of updates that really makes people upset. I know some vendors aren't businesses, but I also think a certain amount of responsibility comes when you take someones money, period. So I think making vendors keep updating on sales while they are active seems very fair, its not like once a week is hard at all.
Show Image(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-2tJsLx9hB8s/Um4nHM_pp6I/AAAAAAAABy0/1r9jsTNPxV0/s1600/Borat-838461.jpg)
This thread brings up some interesting things though. I mean, it definitely seems like Seth is behind. But there are a lot of vendors that are much further behind, and hardly give updates either or do an update with some promise that isn't kept. In some other vending threads people seem totally fine with how long things take, even encourage the vendors to take all the time they want. Like here, I often feel like some displeased people are often afraid to speak up as well, which if done correctly shouldn't be looked down upon. There definitely isnt a consistent level of judgement or accountability by the users for all the vendors, its quite uneven honestly.
I know that each form of feedback system has its issues, and cant be abused as well. Obviously the thing to avoid is people hating a vendor, and just downvoting everything. Votes should probably be annon. and limited to 1 for each buy. Finding a way to let each buyer leave a 1-10 rating on different aspects of the buy (quality, product came as described, overall experience, whatever) without any additional text, and showing the results somewhere on the vendors page would be nice.
Also, I don't think it would be bad to add something like "at least one update is needed per week for running buys" would be good. A lot of the issue with these buys is not that vendors are being malicious, its the silence and lack of updates that really makes people upset. I know some vendors aren't businesses, but I also think a certain amount of responsibility comes when you take someones money, period. So I think making vendors keep updating on sales while they are active seems very fair, its not like once a week is hard at all.
Also, I don't think it would be bad to add something like "at least one update is needed per week for running buys" would be good. A lot of the issue with these buys is not that vendors are being malicious, its the silence and lack of updates that really makes people upset. I know some vendors aren't businesses, but I also think a certain amount of responsibility comes when you take someones money, period. So I think making vendors keep updating on sales while they are active seems very fair, its not like once a week is hard at all.
Show Image(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-2tJsLx9hB8s/Um4nHM_pp6I/AAAAAAAABy0/1r9jsTNPxV0/s1600/Borat-838461.jpg)
This thread brings up some interesting things though. I mean, it definitely seems like Seth is behind. But there are a lot of vendors that are much further behind, and hardly give updates either or do an update with some promise that isn't kept. In some other vending threads people seem totally fine with how long things take, even encourage the vendors to take all the time they want. Like here, I often feel like some displeased people are often afraid to speak up as well, which if done correctly shouldn't be looked down upon. There definitely isnt a consistent level of judgement or accountability by the users for all the vendors, its quite uneven honestly.
I know that each form of feedback system has its issues, and cant be abused as well. Obviously the thing to avoid is people hating a vendor, and just downvoting everything. Votes should probably be annon. and limited to 1 for each buy. Finding a way to let each buyer leave a 1-10 rating on different aspects of the buy (quality, product came as described, overall experience, whatever) without any additional text, and showing the results somewhere on the vendors page would be nice.
Also, I don't think it would be bad to add something like "at least one update is needed per week for running buys" would be good. A lot of the issue with these buys is not that vendors are being malicious, its the silence and lack of updates that really makes people upset. I know some vendors aren't businesses, but I also think a certain amount of responsibility comes when you take someones money, period. So I think making vendors keep updating on sales while they are active seems very fair, its not like once a week is hard at all.
+2
Side note: Livingspeedbump is THE fastest shipper I've bought from btw
actions > words
Also, I don't think it would be bad to add something like "at least one update is needed per week for running buys" would be good. A lot of the issue with these buys is not that vendors are being malicious, its the silence and lack of updates that really makes people upset. I know some vendors aren't businesses, but I also think a certain amount of responsibility comes when you take someones money, period. So I think making vendors keep updating on sales while they are active seems very fair, its not like once a week is hard at all.
(This is getting a bit out of scope for this thread, so I apologize for the derail, but I think this is a good discussion)
One issue I see with the above proposal is how to enforce it. I can no more easily force an organizer to post an update than I can force them to post a package. And previous group buys are already taken into consideration before allowing an organizer to begin a new buy, so if they are lacking updates we are (ideally) already taking that into consideration - the caveat being that we can't read every single post of every thread, so we have imperfect information. But the point still stands that even if we do implement such a rule, how do we enforce it? What do we do if there is not a post every week? Shutting down the buy at that point doesn't help anything. :|
All that said, I do agree with your other points. :thumb:
+2
Side note: Livingspeedbump is THE fastest shipper I've bought from btw
actions > words
I like the weekly updates, but I can see some GB runners getting into the habit of posting “no new updates" or something, and then using it as an excuse.
But I guess we'll cross that bridge if and when we get there.
I feel mortally obligated to someone when I owe them money/goods though. This is part of the reason I DONT personally run GB's. They would be too much stress for me, and I know I would just shut down if things went wrong on my end. It is an understandable response, nobody likes letting others down, but I never take anything with money involved lightly.
Show Image(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-2tJsLx9hB8s/Um4nHM_pp6I/AAAAAAAABy0/1r9jsTNPxV0/s1600/Borat-838461.jpg)
This thread brings up some interesting things though. I mean, it definitely seems like Seth is behind. But there are a lot of vendors that are much further behind, and hardly give updates either or do an update with some promise that isn't kept. In some other vending threads people seem totally fine with how long things take, even encourage the vendors to take all the time they want. Like here, I often feel like some displeased people are often afraid to speak up as well, which if done correctly shouldn't be looked down upon. There definitely isnt a consistent level of judgement or accountability by the users for all the vendors, its quite uneven honestly.
I know that each form of feedback system has its issues, and cant be abused as well. Obviously the thing to avoid is people hating a vendor, and just downvoting everything. Votes should probably be annon. and limited to 1 for each buy. Finding a way to let each buyer leave a 1-10 rating on different aspects of the buy (quality, product came as described, overall experience, whatever) without any additional text, and showing the results somewhere on the vendors page would be nice.
Also, I don't think it would be bad to add something like "at least one update is needed per week for running buys" would be good. A lot of the issue with these buys is not that vendors are being malicious, its the silence and lack of updates that really makes people upset. I know some vendors aren't businesses, but I also think a certain amount of responsibility comes when you take someones money, period. So I think making vendors keep updating on sales while they are active seems very fair, its not like once a week is hard at all.
Show Image(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-2tJsLx9hB8s/Um4nHM_pp6I/AAAAAAAABy0/1r9jsTNPxV0/s1600/Borat-838461.jpg)
This thread brings up some interesting things though. I mean, it definitely seems like Seth is behind. But there are a lot of vendors that are much further behind, and hardly give updates either or do an update with some promise that isn't kept. In some other vending threads people seem totally fine with how long things take, even encourage the vendors to take all the time they want. Like here, I often feel like some displeased people are often afraid to speak up as well, which if done correctly shouldn't be looked down upon. There definitely isnt a consistent level of judgement or accountability by the users for all the vendors, its quite uneven honestly.
I know that each form of feedback system has its issues, and cant be abused as well. Obviously the thing to avoid is people hating a vendor, and just downvoting everything. Votes should probably be annon. and limited to 1 for each buy. Finding a way to let each buyer leave a 1-10 rating on different aspects of the buy (quality, product came as described, overall experience, whatever) without any additional text, and showing the results somewhere on the vendors page would be nice.
Also, I don't think it would be bad to add something like "at least one update is needed per week for running buys" would be good. A lot of the issue with these buys is not that vendors are being malicious, its the silence and lack of updates that really makes people upset. I know some vendors aren't businesses, but I also think a certain amount of responsibility comes when you take someones money, period. So I think making vendors keep updating on sales while they are active seems very fair, its not like once a week is hard at all.
+1
Maybe we can incorporate something that includes: shipping speed once order is placed, communication, (email/PM reply times?), etc.
(This is getting a bit out of scope for this thread, so I apologize for the derail, but I think this is a good discussion)
One issue I see with the above proposal is how to enforce it. I can no more easily force an organizer to post an update than I can force them to post a package. And previous group buys are already taken into consideration before allowing an organizer to begin a new buy, so if they are lacking updates we are (ideally) already taking that into consideration - the caveat being that we can't read every single post of every thread, so we have imperfect information. But the point still stands that even if we do implement such a rule, how do we enforce it? What do we do if there is not a post every week? Shutting down the buy at that point doesn't help anything. :|
All that said, I do agree with your other points. :thumb:
For starters, I'm fine with GH mods never stepping into problems or enforcing agreements... but this community needs some transparency, and people should be allowed to know where to look in order to see how does a certain user behave regarding transactions. IMO, a subforum that it contained a single thread per user would be fine. This way, you find the thread of the user you made a transaction with, add a post with your vote, a simple line for the product, your opinions of said transaction, and a link to the original thread. Oh, and having people not delete their threads make everything a lot easier. I still have no idea why do people recycle their threads, its very confusing to see a thread created last year that just got an item added. You start reading users interest and you are like... WTF?!
For starters, I'm fine with GH mods never stepping into problems or enforcing agreements... but this community needs some transparency, and people should be allowed to know where to look in order to see how does a certain user behave regarding transactions. IMO, a subforum that it contained a single thread per user would be fine. This way, you find the thread of the user you made a transaction with, add a post with your vote, a simple line for the product, your opinions of said transaction, and a link to the original thread. Oh, and having people not delete their threads make everything a lot easier. I still have no idea why do people recycle their threads, its very confusing to see a thread created last year that just got an item added. You start reading users interest and you are like... WTF?!
Note: the forum I mentioned has 0 ads or banners. Nothing. The users can donate if they want to do so, and can also do it to get increased pm capacity and a few other perks. But its a pro-bono community. Well, maybe the admin makes a few cents if we do not account the amount of time he dedicates to maintaining and updating the forum... but all in all, a free community.
Is there a list of GB leaders with 100% Products Delivered On Time Track Records?
Is there a list of GB leaders with 100% Products Delivered On Time Track Records?
What is "on time"?
Is there a list of GB leaders with 100% Products Delivered On Time Track Records?
What is "on time"?
LMAO. Maybe "In my lifetime" works?
It's a serious question though. Timelines in Group Buys are pretty much made up, you know that. :P It's incredibly hard to predict the uncontrollable setbacks incurred by vendors/production, and sorting/shipping can vary a bit too. The main gripe that people have is with lack of communication, not timelines; hence the question. :)
Is there a list of GB leaders with 100% Products Delivered On Time Track Records?
What is "on time"?
LMAO. Maybe "In my lifetime" works?
It's a serious question though. Timelines in Group Buys are pretty much made up, you know that. :P It's incredibly hard to predict the uncontrollable setbacks incurred by vendors/production, and sorting/shipping can vary a bit too. The main gripe that people have is with lack of communication, not timelines; hence the question. :)
It's a serious question though. Timelines in Group Buys are pretty much made up, you know that. :P It's incredibly hard to predict the uncontrollable setbacks incurred by vendors/production, and sorting/shipping can vary a bit too. The main gripe that people have is with lack of communication, not timelines; hence the question. :)
True. I think it's probably better to have a "reasonable amount" reputation when it comes to both communication and timeframe. If the delays are out of the runners control, then communication mitigates the impact that has on the community and placates them. So timeframe doesn't really matter in 90% of GBs if the communication is good IMO.
Also, what about tighter rules about the # of active buys someone can have?
Also, what about tighter rules about the # of active buys someone can have?
I don't really think this is necessary
Are there any recent prominent examples of people running a crap load of group buys to steal everyone's cash?
Also, what about tighter rules about the # of active buys someone can have?
I don't really think this is necessary
Are there any recent prominent examples of people running a crap load of group buys to steal everyone's cash?
Not necessarily, but it increases the complexity/need to be organized if the buys arrive at similar times. The delivery/completion of some of the older ctrl alt buys has been a bit messy (i'm not even sure if all of the toxic/penumbra orders have been shipped out yet), yet they are still churning out new buys. I'm not saying I don't trust them, but I can see how people can feel uneasy about entering new buys if previous ones by the same organizer are still lagging behind.
Also, what about tighter rules about the # of active buys someone can have?
I don't really think this is necessary
Are there any recent prominent examples of people running a crap load of group buys to steal everyone's cash?
Not necessarily, but it increases the complexity/need to be organized if the buys arrive at similar times. The delivery/completion of some of the older ctrl alt buys has been a bit messy (i'm not even sure if all of the toxic/penumbra orders have been shipped out yet), yet they are still churning out new buys. I'm not saying I don't trust them, but I can see how people can feel uneasy about entering new buys if previous ones by the same organizer are still lagging behind.
I personally think that if we waited for every single issue to get ironed out with each group buy before running another one we would be have a much smaller number of group buys each year
I personally think that if we waited for every single issue to get ironed out with each group buy before running another one we would be have a much smaller number of group buys each year
Honestly, I'd rather have that than a buy that's not even completed a year or so after product was in stock.
Also, what about tighter rules about the # of active buys someone can have?
I don't really think this is necessary
Are there any recent prominent examples of people running a crap load of group buys to steal everyone's cash?
Not necessarily, but it increases the complexity/need to be organized if the buys arrive at similar times. The delivery/completion of some of the older ctrl alt buys has been a bit messy (i'm not even sure if all of the toxic/penumbra orders have been shipped out yet), yet they are still churning out new buys. I'm not saying I don't trust them, but I can see how people can feel uneasy about entering new buys if previous ones by the same organizer are still lagging behind.
I personally think that if we waited for every single issue to get ironed out with each group buy before running another one we would be have a much smaller number of group buys each year
Honestly, I'd rather have that than a buy that's not even completed a year or so after product was in stock.
Exactly. Less is not necessarily bad. And in the grand scheme of things people, on average, will get items a lot quicker hopefully.
Some people just arent good at knowing what they can handle, and get bogged down. It isn't cash grabs I'm worried about addressing with that suggestion, rather the cluster of having too many active group buys and the vendor getting bogged down and just dragging buys out for ages.
Exactly. Less is not necessarily bad. And in the grand scheme of things people, on average, will get items a lot quicker hopefully.
Some people just arent good at knowing what they can handle, and get bogged down. It isn't cash grabs I'm worried about addressing with that suggestion, rather the cluster of having too many active group buys and the vendor getting bogged down and just dragging buys out for ages.
I think one of the biggest issues is how we think about the relationship between the GB runner and the participant
I personally think reddit tends to view GB runners as vendors or commercial entities most of the time and as such expects the same kind of service that you would expect from a business - timeliness, more immediate customer service and so on. I've noticed this a little bit when you see people raise paypal disputes with GB runners
GH generally takes a more social view of GB runners and knows that they are just people a lot of the time and that they won't make much if any money from a GB
Exactly. Less is not necessarily bad. And in the grand scheme of things people, on average, will get items a lot quicker hopefully.
Some people just arent good at knowing what they can handle, and get bogged down. It isn't cash grabs I'm worried about addressing with that suggestion, rather the cluster of having too many active group buys and the vendor getting bogged down and just dragging buys out for ages.
I think one of the biggest issues is how we think about the relationship between the GB runner and the participant
I personally think reddit tends to view GB runners as vendors or commercial entities most of the time and as such expects the same kind of service that you would expect from a business - timeliness, more immediate customer service and so on. I've noticed this a little bit when you see people raise paypal disputes with GB runners
GH generally takes a more social view of GB runners and knows that they are just people a lot of the time and that they won't make much if any money from a GB
It's more that most people on GH realize that most of the time these organizers are enthusiasts, like us, who are running these buys in their spare time after their regular jobs and other life commitments.
Exactly. Less is not necessarily bad. And in the grand scheme of things people, on average, will get items a lot quicker hopefully.
Some people just arent good at knowing what they can handle, and get bogged down. It isn't cash grabs I'm worried about addressing with that suggestion, rather the cluster of having too many active group buys and the vendor getting bogged down and just dragging buys out for ages.
I think one of the biggest issues is how we think about the relationship between the GB runner and the participant
I personally think reddit tends to view GB runners as vendors or commercial entities most of the time and as such expects the same kind of service that you would expect from a business - timeliness, more immediate customer service and so on. I've noticed this a little bit when you see people raise paypal disputes with GB runners
GH generally takes a more social view of GB runners and knows that they are just people a lot of the time and that they won't make much if any money from a GB
I just want to chime in and say I'm all for the user feedback subforum. One separate thread for each user seems good to me.
I was thinking the other day, it would be nice if I could just search someone up to see if anyone had something to say about them.
Another idea I would get behind is mandatory HeatWare accounts, but that is harder to enforce than the subforum I'd say.
But at the same time how would you verify that anonymous feedback is genuine, and is the result of an actual dealing and not the result of the reviewers opinion of the person in question?
Is there a list of GB leaders with 100% Products Delivered On Time Track Records?
What is "on time"?
LMAO. Maybe "In my lifetime" works?
It's a serious question though. Timelines in Group Buys are pretty much made up, you know that. :P It's incredibly hard to predict the uncontrollable setbacks incurred by vendors/production, and sorting/shipping can vary a bit too. The main gripe that people have is with lack of communication, not timelines; hence the question. :)
Is there a list of GB leaders with 100% Products Delivered On Time Track Records?
What is "on time"?
LMAO. Maybe "In my lifetime" works?
It's a serious question though. Timelines in Group Buys are pretty much made up, you know that. :P It's incredibly hard to predict the uncontrollable setbacks incurred by vendors/production, and sorting/shipping can vary a bit too. The main gripe that people have is with lack of communication, not timelines; hence the question. :)
Maybe a year? Seems like a reasonable expectation even for non-professionals.
Will this Feedback subreddit be created?
Is there a list of GB leaders with 100% Products Delivered On Time Track Records?
What is "on time"?
LMAO. Maybe "In my lifetime" works?
It's a serious question though. Timelines in Group Buys are pretty much made up, you know that. :P It's incredibly hard to predict the uncontrollable setbacks incurred by vendors/production, and sorting/shipping can vary a bit too. The main gripe that people have is with lack of communication, not timelines; hence the question. :)
Maybe a year? Seems like a reasonable expectation even for non-professionals.
Will this Feedback subreddit be created?
We don't create subreddits. There is however a chance that we will create a subforum :)
It's something we'll look into, particularly because there seems to be significant community interest in some sort of feedback system. However, at this point, I can't promise what such a system would look like, or how it will be implemented.
I just want to chime in and say I'm all for the user feedback subforum. One separate thread for each user seems good to me.
I was thinking the other day, it would be nice if I could just search someone up to see if anyone had something to say about them.
Another idea I would get behind is mandatory HeatWare accounts, but that is harder to enforce than the subforum I'd say.
I just worry that "text" feedback, that isnt anonymous at least, will not accomplish anything. Now, people are afraid to leave bad feedback or call someone out at times, and I think avoiding that is critical to making the reviews as honest as possible. No text also means no arguments too.
Is there a list of GB leaders with 100% Products Delivered On Time Track Records?
What is "on time"?
LMAO. Maybe "In my lifetime" works?
It's a serious question though. Timelines in Group Buys are pretty much made up, you know that. :P It's incredibly hard to predict the uncontrollable setbacks incurred by vendors/production, and sorting/shipping can vary a bit too. The main gripe that people have is with lack of communication, not timelines; hence the question. :)
Maybe a year? Seems like a reasonable expectation even for non-professionals.
Will this Feedback subreddit be created?
Also, what about tighter rules about the # of active buys someone can have?
I don't really think this is necessary
Are there any recent prominent examples of people running a crap load of group buys to steal everyone's cash?
Not necessarily, but it increases the complexity/need to be organized if the buys arrive at similar times. The delivery/completion of some of the older ctrl alt buys has been a bit messy (i'm not even sure if all of the toxic/penumbra orders have been shipped out yet), yet they are still churning out new buys. I'm not saying I don't trust them, but I can see how people can feel uneasy about entering new buys if previous ones by the same organizer are still lagging behind.
I personally think that if we waited for every single issue to get ironed out with each group buy before running another one we would be have a much smaller number of group buys each year
Honestly, I'd rather have that than a buy that's not even completed a year or so after product was in stock.
But at the same time how would you verify that anonymous feedback is genuine, and is the result of an actual dealing and not the result of the reviewers opinion of the person in question?
Yeah, that's a big advantage to a thread. Also, if someone leaves a remark and it seems like it's missing information or is sharing misinformation, you can ask for clarification, etc.
But at the same time how would you verify that anonymous feedback is genuine, and is the result of an actual dealing and not the result of the reviewers opinion of the person in question?
But at the same time how would you verify that anonymous feedback is genuine, and is the result of an actual dealing and not the result of the reviewers opinion of the person in question?
I mean, there would be ways to do it but all would probably be more hassle than they are worth. Public feedback threads would be a good start in the very least I think. Valid point for sure though.
I still think it would be good to cap how many GB's can be run all at once. I do not think vendors with GB's that are incomplete from 1, god forbid 2 years ago should still be allowed to start up and run new buys. Of course, if a buy is run and it is stated/expected to run that long that is fine, but if a buy is delayed, they should have to hold off on launching new ones until the old ones are settled.
I get that of these GB runners aren't official businesses, but i think it is for the best interest of the users that those who have officially been recognized by GH with a subforum are held to a bit higher standards. Perhaps you let them have 2 open buys at once, where individuals can only run 1 GB at a time under normal circumstances.
Great idea.
Poor execution.
Tis the season to be thankful for his inputGreat idea.
Poor execution.
Keep spamming, you're almost at 50
Tis the season to be thankful for his inputGreat idea.
Poor execution.
Keep spamming, you're almost at 50
Great idea.
Poor execution.
He's just trolling to get to 50 posts for one of the giveaways.Great idea.
Poor execution.
You think that the way this thread was created to discuss the idea of a vendor/user feedback system was poorly executed? Did you even read the thread before you commented? :))
Not trolling.
I see a lot of talking and no action.
Not trolling.So instead of spamming your post count, why not make some meaningful suggestions?
I see a lot of talking and no action.
Not trolling.So instead of spamming your post count, why not make some meaningful suggestions?
I see a lot of talking and no action.
(https://media.giphy.com/media/uY0zZnQqZD8Jy/giphy.gif)Not trolling.So instead of spamming your post count, why not make some meaningful suggestions?
I see a lot of talking and no action.
Shut up! I'll get found out
Hoff too fast and I beat your edit
Not trolling.So instead of spamming your post count, why not make some meaningful suggestions?
I see a lot of talking and no action.
Shut up! I'll get found out
Hoff too fast and I beat your editShow Image(https://media.giphy.com/media/uY0zZnQqZD8Jy/giphy.gif)
Ghost2slow
I'll be honest, haven't read a single wall of text in this thread. Just came here to say it doesn't need to be something overly complex, just a simple positive, negative, or neutral feedback system should suffice. www.golfwrx.com has a pretty good system in place. They have a separate forum for disputes, and when a listing gets flagged by someone it gets moved to that section. They also have a decent feedback system in place there as well.
Not trolling.
I see a lot of talking and no action.
Not trolling.
I see a lot of talking and no action.
Ideas must be shared/conjured up/discussed first. Rushing into action would likely make things worse, not better.
Good job getting a +1 to your post count though. :thumb:
Not trolling.
I see a lot of talking and no action.
Ideas must be shared/conjured up/discussed first. Rushing into action would likely make things worse, not better.
Good job getting a +1 to your post count though. :thumb:
Thanks!
Someday I hope to have as many as SpamAray!
Not trolling.
I see a lot of talking and no action.
Ideas must be shared/conjured up/discussed first. Rushing into action would likely make things worse, not better.
Good job getting a +1 to your post count though. :thumb:
Thanks!
Someday I hope to have as many as SpamAray!
First, please learn to spell.
Well ripster is the only one who spells it wrong like that so.....Not trolling.
I see a lot of talking and no action.
Ideas must be shared/conjured up/discussed first. Rushing into action would likely make things worse, not better.
Good job getting a +1 to your post count though. :thumb:
Thanks!
Someday I hope to have as many as SpamAray!
First, please learn to spell.
Well, looks like I get to start calling you Aray from now on hahahaha :p
Well ripster is the only one who spells it wrong like that so.....Not trolling.
I see a lot of talking and no action.
Ideas must be shared/conjured up/discussed first. Rushing into action would likely make things worse, not better.
Good job getting a +1 to your post count though. :thumb:
Thanks!
Someday I hope to have as many as SpamAray!
First, please learn to spell.
Well, looks like I get to start calling you Aray from now on hahahaha :p
Well ripster is the only one who spells it wrong like that so.....Not trolling.
I see a lot of talking and no action.
Ideas must be shared/conjured up/discussed first. Rushing into action would likely make things worse, not better.
Good job getting a +1 to your post count though. :thumb:
Thanks!
Someday I hope to have as many as SpamAray!
First, please learn to spell.
Well, looks like I get to start calling you Aray from now on hahahaha
I wanted to share the mod team's thoughts on this matter. We have discussed this subject for about a week now, with input from the majority of moderators and admins.
At this point in time, we will not be implementing a local feedback system, or user-specific feedback threads. Geekhack has heatware linking in user profiles, and we recommend users continue/start to use that for rating transactions. The major reason for this, is that the site does not want to be in a position where we are endorsing anyone. So due to that, all feedback ratings should be external to the forum.
Heatware is an effective method for leaving feedback on user transactions. We highly suggest people take more advantage of it in the future.
I wanted to share the mod team's thoughts on this matter. We have discussed this subject for about a week now, with input from the majority of moderators and admins.
At this point in time, we will not be implementing a local feedback system, or user-specific feedback threads. Geekhack has heatware linking in user profiles, and we recommend users continue/start to use that for rating transactions. The major reason for this, is that the site does not want to be in a position where we are endorsing anyone. So due to that, all feedback ratings should be external to the forum.
Heatware is an effective method for leaving feedback on user transactions. We highly suggest people take more advantage of it in the future.
That's reasonable; maybe edit the Stickies strongly encouraging heatware? Or a new sticky explaining and encouraging people to update? I haven't used it in years, but I'm not opposed.
Vendors aren't in Heatware.
Not sure what this has to do with this Vendor Feedback proposal.
Vendors aren't in Heatware.
Not sure what this has to do with this Vendor Feedback proposal.
This thread isn't just about vendor feedback though -- it's also about feedback for specific users. In fact, it seems to me that at least half of the discussion in this thread has been regarding users, whether for the classifieds section or GB runners. We are currently looking into different options for vendor feedback.
I wanted to share the mod team's thoughts on this matter. We have discussed this subject for about a week now, with input from the majority of moderators and admins.
At this point in time, we will not be implementing a local feedback system, or user-specific feedback threads. Geekhack has heatware linking in user profiles, and we recommend users continue/start to use that for rating transactions. The major reason for this, is that the site does not want to be in a position where we are endorsing anyone. So due to that, all feedback ratings should be external to the forum.
Heatware is an effective method for leaving feedback on user transactions. We highly suggest people take more advantage of it in the future.
Vendors aren't in Heatware.
Not sure what this has to do with this Vendor Feedback proposal.
This thread isn't just about vendor feedback though -- it's also about feedback for specific users. In fact, it seems to me that at least half of the discussion in this thread has been regarding users, whether for the classifieds section or GB runners. We are currently looking into different options for vendor feedback.
Yeah, I was under the impression this was all just for vendors with Sub Forums. I don't see any changes that can/should be made to classifieds really.
Vendors aren't in Heatware.
Not sure what this has to do with this Vendor Feedback proposal.
This thread isn't just about vendor feedback though -- it's also about feedback for specific users. In fact, it seems to me that at least half of the discussion in this thread has been regarding users, whether for the classifieds section or GB runners. We are currently looking into different options for vendor feedback.
Yeah, I was under the impression this was all just for vendors with Sub Forums. I don't see any changes that can/should be made to classifieds really.
But... the entire line of discussion started with talks about individuals, either in classifieds or as GB runners. It's also in the thread title. I know a lot of your posts have been directed towards the idea of vendors, but that isn't the case for everyone who spoke here.
We aren't really making any changes to Classifieds, other than perhaps more strongly encouraging users to use heatware or other feedback mechanisms.
Again, we are still looking into options for vendor feedback. Please feel free to continue discussion on that aspect, and once we've come to a decision, we will make everyone aware of it.
Regarding classifieds, there is starting to be more and more [WTB] threads wanting to buy either unicorn boards(KMAC, OTD, LZ, etc.) or artisans(CCs, Bros, Binges, etc.). I feel like at this point we all know that nobody will approach them for the most part. If somebody is going to sell said item they would either A. approach a friend of theirs that had shared interest in the item in the past or B. create their own [WTS] thread. As far as I know it's not breaking any rules or anything but all it does is clog up classifieds with daily bumping.
I can't really think of a good of a good solution either other than have a sub thread for customs and artisans but I'm sure others will be against that.
Regarding classifieds, there is starting to be more and more [WTB] threads wanting to buy either unicorn boards(KMAC, OTD, LZ, etc.) or artisans(CCs, Bros, Binges, etc.). I feel like at this point we all know that nobody will approach them for the most part. If somebody is going to sell said item they would either A. approach a friend of theirs that had shared interest in the item in the past or B. create their own [WTS] thread. As far as I know it's not breaking any rules or anything but all it does is clog up classifieds with daily bumping.
I can't really think of a good of a good solution either other than have a sub thread for customs and artisans but I'm sure others will be against that.
I managed to find something I never thought I would through this method
Just need to keep the bumping to a minimum
Regarding classifieds, there is starting to be more and more [WTB] threads wanting to buy either unicorn boards(KMAC, OTD, LZ, etc.) or artisans(CCs, Bros, Binges, etc.). I feel like at this point we all know that nobody will approach them for the most part. If somebody is going to sell said item they would either A. approach a friend of theirs that had shared interest in the item in the past or B. create their own [WTS] thread. As far as I know it's not breaking any rules or anything but all it does is clog up classifieds with daily bumping.
I can't really think of a good of a good solution either other than have a sub thread for customs and artisans but I'm sure others will be against that.
I managed to find something I never thought I would through this method
Just need to keep the bumping to a minimum
Gotta get the best advertising, can't miss out on a good deal.. tbh I think a large part of the community is actively trading/selling/buying. I am trying to limit my bumping to weekly or twice monthly
.
I for one would be down for "a sub thread for customs and artisans"
Regarding classifieds, there is starting to be more and more [WTB] threads wanting to buy either unicorn boards(KMAC, OTD, LZ, etc.) or artisans(CCs, Bros, Binges, etc.). I feel like at this point we all know that nobody will approach them for the most part. If somebody is going to sell said item they would either A. approach a friend of theirs that had shared interest in the item in the past or B. create their own [WTS] thread. As far as I know it's not breaking any rules or anything but all it does is clog up classifieds with daily bumping.
I can't really think of a good of a good solution either other than have a sub thread for customs and artisans but I'm sure others will be against that.
I managed to find something I never thought I would through this method
Just need to keep the bumping to a minimum
Gotta get the best advertising, can't miss out on a good deal.. tbh I think a large part of the community is actively trading/selling/buying. I am trying to limit my bumping to weekly or twice monthly
.
I for one would be down for "a sub thread for customs and artisans"
Pretty much all of the things I most value have come about "dark pool" style through pm's with members that never post their stuff in the classifieds
Regarding classifieds, there is starting to be more and more [WTB] threads wanting to buy either unicorn boards(KMAC, OTD, LZ, etc.) or artisans(CCs, Bros, Binges, etc.). I feel like at this point we all know that nobody will approach them for the most part. If somebody is going to sell said item they would either A. approach a friend of theirs that had shared interest in the item in the past or B. create their own [WTS] thread. As far as I know it's not breaking any rules or anything but all it does is clog up classifieds with daily bumping.
I can't really think of a good of a good solution either other than have a sub thread for customs and artisans but I'm sure others will be against that.
I managed to find something I never thought I would through this method
Just need to keep the bumping to a minimum
Gotta get the best advertising, can't miss out on a good deal.. tbh I think a large part of the community is actively trading/selling/buying. I am trying to limit my bumping to weekly or twice monthly
.
I for one would be down for "a sub thread for customs and artisans"
Pretty much all of the things I most value have come about "dark pool" style through pm's with members that never post their stuff in the classifieds
Regarding classifieds, there is starting to be more and more [WTB] threads wanting to buy either unicorn boards(KMAC, OTD, LZ, etc.) or artisans(CCs, Bros, Binges, etc.). I feel like at this point we all know that nobody will approach them for the most part. If somebody is going to sell said item they would either A. approach a friend of theirs that had shared interest in the item in the past or B. create their own [WTS] thread. As far as I know it's not breaking any rules or anything but all it does is clog up classifieds with daily bumping.
I can't really think of a good of a good solution either other than have a sub thread for customs and artisans but I'm sure others will be against that.
I managed to find something I never thought I would through this method
Just need to keep the bumping to a minimum
Gotta get the best advertising, can't miss out on a good deal.. tbh I think a large part of the community is actively trading/selling/buying. I am trying to limit my bumping to weekly or twice monthly
.
I for one would be down for "a sub thread for customs and artisans"
Pretty much all of the things I most value have come about "dark pool" style through pm's with members that never post their stuff in the classifieds
How does that even start, do I just PM someone who I think has an item I would like to buy or trade for?
I would feel really weird doing that.
Regarding classifieds, there is starting to be more and more [WTB] threads wanting to buy either unicorn boards(KMAC, OTD, LZ, etc.) or artisans(CCs, Bros, Binges, etc.). I feel like at this point we all know that nobody will approach them for the most part. If somebody is going to sell said item they would either A. approach a friend of theirs that had shared interest in the item in the past or B. create their own [WTS] thread. As far as I know it's not breaking any rules or anything but all it does is clog up classifieds with daily bumping.
I can't really think of a good of a good solution either other than have a sub thread for customs and artisans but I'm sure others will be against that.
I managed to find something I never thought I would through this method
Just need to keep the bumping to a minimum
Gotta get the best advertising, can't miss out on a good deal.. tbh I think a large part of the community is actively trading/selling/buying. I am trying to limit my bumping to weekly or twice monthly
.
I for one would be down for "a sub thread for customs and artisans"
Pretty much all of the things I most value have come about "dark pool" style through pm's with members that never post their stuff in the classifieds
How does that even start, do I just PM someone who I think has an item I would like to buy or trade for?
I would feel really weird doing that.
What about a split classifieds? One for Selling and one for Buying?
Personally, yeah, the artisan WTB threads especially are annoying, especially since they seem to be the ones that wait till the second after 24hrs to bump again.
As User18 mentioned, this thread included both issues with Classifieds as well as Vendors. I would like to explicitly point out that the ideas and issues below are specifically related to vendors with their own official GeekHack sub forums, and these ideas and thoughts are only pertaining to those vendors/individuals and not any other group. I just want to avoid any possible confusion here
I think that when GeekHack Mods give a sub forum to a Vendor/Artisan that they are endorsing them in an official capacity. From the eyes of new members that may not be completely aware of who the vendors are, or what their reputation is, or how long they have been around, seeing a sub forum for a particular vendor/artisan service will inevitably give them the impression that they are a solid and trusted seller. Obviously GH is not responsible in any way for the actions of the vendors, but I think that when an official sub forum is given to a vendor, some additional rules should apply, especially because it will only help their business.
I think one thing that really needs to change is to limit the # of open buys a vendor/artisan can have open any any given time. I think 3 is more than enough. If a vendor still has 3 open buys, limited human resources to get those buys out, and STILL starts more buys, that is nothing but a slap in the face to those who have participated in those previous buys as it will only add more time and delays to their orders. Another solution would be to require time to completion on the buys, but that is obviously a dumb idea. Buys often hit snags well outside of the control of the vendors here. But, by limiting the # of active buys a vendor can have GH would essentially be protecting the vendors by making them finish what they start and not over estimate their time or ability to get items out, as well as the buyers, by hopefully keeping time to receiving their items to a minimum.
I also think having a feedback thread in their forums for feedback, that the vendors themselves can't edit, would be beneficial. In my earlier thoughts, I thought having an anonymous feedback system would be good, as there is a degree of people being afraid to leave negative feedback for various reasons. Policing and proving the legitimacy of the anonymous system would be a nightmare though. Having a thread where customers could leave their feedback, and the vendors could chime in when needed seems like the best bet, but making sure the vendors can just delete threads they don't like would be key here.
I don't think any of these rules are too strict, especially when the sub forum will only be helping them out.
As User18 mentioned, this thread included both issues with Classifieds as well as Vendors. I would like to explicitly point out that the ideas and issues below are specifically related to vendors with their own official GeekHack sub forums, and these ideas and thoughts are only pertaining to those vendors/individuals and not any other group. I just want to avoid any possible confusion here
I think that when GeekHack Mods give a sub forum to a Vendor/Artisan that they are endorsing them in an official capacity. From the eyes of new members that may not be completely aware of who the vendors are, or what their reputation is, or how long they have been around, seeing a sub forum for a particular vendor/artisan service will inevitably give them the impression that they are a solid and trusted seller. Obviously GH is not responsible in any way for the actions of the vendors, but I think that when an official sub forum is given to a vendor, some additional rules should apply, especially because it will only help their business.
I think one thing that really needs to change is to limit the # of open buys a vendor/artisan can have open any any given time. I think 3 is more than enough. If a vendor still has 3 open buys, limited human resources to get those buys out, and STILL starts more buys, that is nothing but a slap in the face to those who have participated in those previous buys as it will only add more time and delays to their orders. Another solution would be to require time to completion on the buys, but that is obviously a dumb idea. Buys often hit snags well outside of the control of the vendors here. But, by limiting the # of active buys a vendor can have GH would essentially be protecting the vendors by making them finish what they start and not over estimate their time or ability to get items out, as well as the buyers, by hopefully keeping time to receiving their items to a minimum.
I also think having a feedback thread in their forums for feedback, that the vendors themselves can't edit, would be beneficial. In my earlier thoughts, I thought having an anonymous feedback system would be good, as there is a degree of people being afraid to leave negative feedback for various reasons. Policing and proving the legitimacy of the anonymous system would be a nightmare though. Having a thread where customers could leave their feedback, and the vendors could chime in when needed seems like the best bet, but making sure the vendors can just delete threads they don't like would be key here.
I don't think any of these rules are too strict, especially when the sub forum will only be helping them out.
I agree with most of it except for limiting the number of buys. How are the moderators to determine whether or not a vendor is capable of running multiple buys? Some people may be unable to handle just one, while other, more experience individuals/groups could probably handle five or more.
As User18 mentioned, this thread included both issues with Classifieds as well as Vendors. I would like to explicitly point out that the ideas and issues below are specifically related to vendors with their own official GeekHack sub forums, and these ideas and thoughts are only pertaining to those vendors/individuals and not any other group. I just want to avoid any possible confusion here
I think that when GeekHack Mods give a sub forum to a Vendor/Artisan that they are endorsing them in an official capacity. From the eyes of new members that may not be completely aware of who the vendors are, or what their reputation is, or how long they have been around, seeing a sub forum for a particular vendor/artisan service will inevitably give them the impression that they are a solid and trusted seller. Obviously GH is not responsible in any way for the actions of the vendors, but I think that when an official sub forum is given to a vendor, some additional rules should apply, especially because it will only help their business.
I think one thing that really needs to change is to limit the # of open buys a vendor/artisan can have open any any given time. I think 3 is more than enough. If a vendor still has 3 open buys, limited human resources to get those buys out, and STILL starts more buys, that is nothing but a slap in the face to those who have participated in those previous buys as it will only add more time and delays to their orders. Another solution would be to require time to completion on the buys, but that is obviously a dumb idea. Buys often hit snags well outside of the control of the vendors here. But, by limiting the # of active buys a vendor can have GH would essentially be protecting the vendors by making them finish what they start and not over estimate their time or ability to get items out, as well as the buyers, by hopefully keeping time to receiving their items to a minimum.
I also think having a feedback thread in their forums for feedback, that the vendors themselves can't edit, would be beneficial. In my earlier thoughts, I thought having an anonymous feedback system would be good, as there is a degree of people being afraid to leave negative feedback for various reasons. Policing and proving the legitimacy of the anonymous system would be a nightmare though. Having a thread where customers could leave their feedback, and the vendors could chime in when needed seems like the best bet, but making sure the vendors can just delete threads they don't like would be key here.
I don't think any of these rules are too strict, especially when the sub forum will only be helping them out.
I agree with most of it except for limiting the number of buys. How are the moderators to determine whether or not a vendor is capable of running multiple buys? Some people may be unable to handle just one, while other, more experience individuals/groups could probably handle five or more.
I dont think a group here, outside companys like Massdrop, have ever managed to successfully juggle 5 group buys, AND deliver them all on time to 100% completion. Yes, the idea is rough, and very few simple ideas will be able to encapsulate everyone running group buys on the same level.
Other ideas like making vendors guess a date of completion, and then freezing further group buys if more than 2 previous one are cuttently "overdue" could also work.
The simple issue is a few vendors start more group buys than they finish it seems like, and this is a problem when you have an official sub forum imo. Vendors not ok with this could always opt out of having an official sub forum
As User18 mentioned, this thread included both issues with Classifieds as well as Vendors. I would like to explicitly point out that the ideas and issues below are specifically related to vendors with their own official GeekHack sub forums, and these ideas and thoughts are only pertaining to those vendors/individuals and not any other group. I just want to avoid any possible confusion here
I think that when GeekHack Mods give a sub forum to a Vendor/Artisan that they are endorsing them in an official capacity. From the eyes of new members that may not be completely aware of who the vendors are, or what their reputation is, or how long they have been around, seeing a sub forum for a particular vendor/artisan service will inevitably give them the impression that they are a solid and trusted seller. Obviously GH is not responsible in any way for the actions of the vendors, but I think that when an official sub forum is given to a vendor, some additional rules should apply, especially because it will only help their business.
I think one thing that really needs to change is to limit the # of open buys a vendor/artisan can have open any any given time. I think 3 is more than enough. If a vendor still has 3 open buys, limited human resources to get those buys out, and STILL starts more buys, that is nothing but a slap in the face to those who have participated in those previous buys as it will only add more time and delays to their orders. Another solution would be to require time to completion on the buys, but that is obviously a dumb idea. Buys often hit snags well outside of the control of the vendors here. But, by limiting the # of active buys a vendor can have GH would essentially be protecting the vendors by making them finish what they start and not over estimate their time or ability to get items out, as well as the buyers, by hopefully keeping time to receiving their items to a minimum.
I also think having a feedback thread in their forums for feedback, that the vendors themselves can't edit, would be beneficial. In my earlier thoughts, I thought having an anonymous feedback system would be good, as there is a degree of people being afraid to leave negative feedback for various reasons. Policing and proving the legitimacy of the anonymous system would be a nightmare though. Having a thread where customers could leave their feedback, and the vendors could chime in when needed seems like the best bet, but making sure the vendors can just delete threads they don't like would be key here.
I don't think any of these rules are too strict, especially when the sub forum will only be helping them out.
I agree with most of it except for limiting the number of buys. How are the moderators to determine whether or not a vendor is capable of running multiple buys? Some people may be unable to handle just one, while other, more experience individuals/groups could probably handle five or more.
I dont think a group here, outside companys like Massdrop, have ever managed to successfully juggle 5 group buys, AND deliver them all on time to 100% completion. Yes, the idea is rough, and very few simple ideas will be able to encapsulate everyone running group buys on the same level.
Other ideas like making vendors guess a date of completion, and then freezing further group buys if more than 2 previous one are cuttently "overdue" could also work.
The simple issue is a few vendors start more group buys than they finish it seems like, and this is a problem when you have an official sub forum imo. Vendors not ok with this could always opt out of having an official sub forum
That does sound fair. I've not been around long enough to see the failure any/or delay of any group buys, but I have heard about them. I'm surprised anyone simply accepts the excuses or just lack of communication from those hosting the buy. I suppose this is a hobby with infinite patience on the community's end and few choices when it comes to group buys.
As User18 mentioned, this thread included both issues with Classifieds as well as Vendors. I would like to explicitly point out that the ideas and issues below are specifically related to vendors with their own official GeekHack sub forums, and these ideas and thoughts are only pertaining to those vendors/individuals and not any other group. I just want to avoid any possible confusion here
I think that when GeekHack Mods give a sub forum to a Vendor/Artisan that they are endorsing them in an official capacity. From the eyes of new members that may not be completely aware of who the vendors are, or what their reputation is, or how long they have been around, seeing a sub forum for a particular vendor/artisan service will inevitably give them the impression that they are a solid and trusted seller. Obviously GH is not responsible in any way for the actions of the vendors, but I think that when an official sub forum is given to a vendor, some additional rules should apply, especially because it will only help their business.
I think one thing that really needs to change is to limit the # of open buys a vendor/artisan can have open any any given time. I think 3 is more than enough. If a vendor still has 3 open buys, limited human resources to get those buys out, and STILL starts more buys, that is nothing but a slap in the face to those who have participated in those previous buys as it will only add more time and delays to their orders. Another solution would be to require time to completion on the buys, but that is obviously a dumb idea. Buys often hit snags well outside of the control of the vendors here. But, by limiting the # of active buys a vendor can have GH would essentially be protecting the vendors by making them finish what they start and not over estimate their time or ability to get items out, as well as the buyers, by hopefully keeping time to receiving their items to a minimum.
I also think having a feedback thread in their forums for feedback, that the vendors themselves can't edit, would be beneficial. In my earlier thoughts, I thought having an anonymous feedback system would be good, as there is a degree of people being afraid to leave negative feedback for various reasons. Policing and proving the legitimacy of the anonymous system would be a nightmare though. Having a thread where customers could leave their feedback, and the vendors could chime in when needed seems like the best bet, but making sure the vendors can just delete threads they don't like would be key here.
I don't think any of these rules are too strict, especially when the sub forum will only be helping them out.
I agree with most of it except for limiting the number of buys. How are the moderators to determine whether or not a vendor is capable of running multiple buys? Some people may be unable to handle just one, while other, more experience individuals/groups could probably handle five or more.
I dont think a group here, outside companys like Massdrop, have ever managed to successfully juggle 5 group buys, AND deliver them all on time to 100% completion. Yes, the idea is rough, and very few simple ideas will be able to encapsulate everyone running group buys on the same level.
Other ideas like making vendors guess a date of completion, and then freezing further group buys if more than 2 previous one are cuttently "overdue" could also work.
The simple issue is a few vendors start more group buys than they finish it seems like, and this is a problem when you have an official sub forum imo. Vendors not ok with this could always opt out of having an official sub forum
That does sound fair. I've not been around long enough to see the failure any/or delay of any group buys, but I have heard about them. I'm surprised anyone simply accepts the excuses or just lack of communication from those hosting the buy. I suppose this is a hobby with infinite patience on the community's end and few choices when it comes to group buys.
It's really not a matter of "accepting excuses".I understand this, really, I do. But the idea that someone expressing frustration about being mislead (even when it is done with the best of intentions) being boiled down to a outburst is part of the problem.
Say an organizer says there will be delays because of X reason. You are fed up with delays, so you choose to not "accept" this delay. What do you do? You are on the other side of the Internet from someone you do not know personally, on a website that is not designed or intended to primarily be a place to sell wares. You express distaste, but come across as impatient or needy. Backlash ensues. People fight over how much time is appropriate to wait before complaining. All the while the organizer is still working on the project (benefit of the doubt) and simply needs more time. How does the outburst help?
Reviews and feedback are very helpful, I can't and wouldn't question that. But there are plenty of scenarios where waiting is indeed the best course of action.
It's really not a matter of "accepting excuses".I understand this, really, I do. But the idea that someone expressing frustration about being mislead (even when it is done with the best of intentions) being boiled down to a outburst is part of the problem.
Say an organizer says there will be delays because of X reason. You are fed up with delays, so you choose to not "accept" this delay. What do you do? You are on the other side of the Internet from someone you do not know personally, on a website that is not designed or intended to primarily be a place to sell wares. You express distaste, but come across as impatient or needy. Backlash ensues. People fight over how much time is appropriate to wait before complaining. All the while the organizer is still working on the project (benefit of the doubt) and simply needs more time. How does the outburst help?
Reviews and feedback are very helpful, I can't and wouldn't question that. But there are plenty of scenarios where waiting is indeed the best course of action.
At some point it is well with in reason to have an "outburst". A polite one based in fact, not emotion. Because promises matter. Expectations matter. If people just sit back and allow things to continue unchecked honestly, what good does that do? Shouldn't the voice of the people matter? And yes, next time you could choose not to join, but that doesn't help the 'this time' you may find yourself in.
I understand your stance on this, so no need to explain. :thumb:It's really not a matter of "accepting excuses".I understand this, really, I do. But the idea that someone expressing frustration about being mislead (even when it is done with the best of intentions) being boiled down to a outburst is part of the problem.
Say an organizer says there will be delays because of X reason. You are fed up with delays, so you choose to not "accept" this delay. What do you do? You are on the other side of the Internet from someone you do not know personally, on a website that is not designed or intended to primarily be a place to sell wares. You express distaste, but come across as impatient or needy. Backlash ensues. People fight over how much time is appropriate to wait before complaining. All the while the organizer is still working on the project (benefit of the doubt) and simply needs more time. How does the outburst help?
Reviews and feedback are very helpful, I can't and wouldn't question that. But there are plenty of scenarios where waiting is indeed the best course of action.
At some point it is well with in reason to have an "outburst". A polite one based in fact, not emotion. Because promises matter. Expectations matter. If people just sit back and allow things to continue unchecked honestly, what good does that do? Shouldn't the voice of the people matter? And yes, next time you could choose not to join, but that doesn't help the 'this time' you may find yourself in.
"Outburst" was a poor choice of word, you are correct.
I've commented on this sort of thing so many times by this point that I feel like a broken record.
I have both sympathy and empathy coming out my ears. If you honestly think that I meant anything negative by my phrasing, then you will have to wait until I have more time to draft a more proper message.
As User18 mentioned, this thread included both issues with Classifieds as well as Vendors. I would like to explicitly point out that the ideas and issues below are specifically related to vendors with their own official GeekHack sub forums, and these ideas and thoughts are only pertaining to those vendors/individuals and not any other group. I just want to avoid any possible confusion here
I think that when GeekHack Mods give a sub forum to a Vendor/Artisan that they are endorsing them in an official capacity. From the eyes of new members that may not be completely aware of who the vendors are, or what their reputation is, or how long they have been around, seeing a sub forum for a particular vendor/artisan service will inevitably give them the impression that they are a solid and trusted seller. Obviously GH is not responsible in any way for the actions of the vendors, but I think that when an official sub forum is given to a vendor, some additional rules should apply, especially because it will only help their business.
I think one thing that really needs to change is to limit the # of open buys a vendor/artisan can have open any any given time. I think 3 is more than enough. If a vendor still has 3 open buys, limited human resources to get those buys out, and STILL starts more buys, that is nothing but a slap in the face to those who have participated in those previous buys as it will only add more time and delays to their orders. Another solution would be to require time to completion on the buys, but that is obviously a dumb idea. Buys often hit snags well outside of the control of the vendors here. But, by limiting the # of active buys a vendor can have GH would essentially be protecting the vendors by making them finish what they start and not over estimate their time or ability to get items out, as well as the buyers, by hopefully keeping time to receiving their items to a minimum.
I also think having a feedback thread in their forums for feedback, that the vendors themselves can't edit, would be beneficial. In my earlier thoughts, I thought having an anonymous feedback system would be good, as there is a degree of people being afraid to leave negative feedback for various reasons. Policing and proving the legitimacy of the anonymous system would be a nightmare though. Having a thread where customers could leave their feedback, and the vendors could chime in when needed seems like the best bet, but making sure the vendors can just delete threads they don't like would be key here.
I don't think any of these rules are too strict, especially when the sub forum will only be helping them out.
I agree with most of it except for limiting the number of buys. How are the moderators to determine whether or not a vendor is capable of running multiple buys? Some people may be unable to handle just one, while other, more experience individuals/groups could probably handle five or more.
I dont think a group here, outside companys like Massdrop, have ever managed to successfully juggle 5 group buys, AND deliver them all on time to 100% completion. Yes, the idea is rough, and very few simple ideas will be able to encapsulate everyone running group buys on the same level.
Other ideas like making vendors guess a date of completion, and then freezing further group buys if more than 2 previous one are cuttently "overdue" could also work.
The simple issue is a few vendors start more group buys than they finish it seems like, and this is a problem when you have an official sub forum imo. Vendors not ok with this could always opt out of having an official sub forum
That does sound fair. I've not been around long enough to see the failure any/or delay of any group buys, but I have heard about them. I'm surprised anyone simply accepts the excuses or just lack of communication from those hosting the buy. I suppose this is a hobby with infinite patience on the community's end and few choices when it comes to group buys.
It's really not a matter of "accepting excuses".
Say an organizer says there will be delays because of X reason. You are fed up with delays, so you choose to not "accept" this delay. What do you do? You are on the other side of the Internet from someone you do not know personally, on a website that is not designed or intended to primarily be a place to sell wares. You express distaste, but come across as impatient or needy. Backlash ensues. People fight over how much time is appropriate to wait before complaining. All the while the organizer is still working on the project (benefit of the doubt) and simply needs more time. How does the outburst help?
Reviews and feedback are very helpful, I can't and wouldn't question that. But there are plenty of scenarios where waiting is indeed the best course of action.
As User18 mentioned, this thread included both issues with Classifieds as well as Vendors. I would like to explicitly point out that the ideas and issues below are specifically related to vendors with their own official GeekHack sub forums, and these ideas and thoughts are only pertaining to those vendors/individuals and not any other group. I just want to avoid any possible confusion here
I think that when GeekHack Mods give a sub forum to a Vendor/Artisan that they are endorsing them in an official capacity. From the eyes of new members that may not be completely aware of who the vendors are, or what their reputation is, or how long they have been around, seeing a sub forum for a particular vendor/artisan service will inevitably give them the impression that they are a solid and trusted seller. Obviously GH is not responsible in any way for the actions of the vendors, but I think that when an official sub forum is given to a vendor, some additional rules should apply, especially because it will only help their business.
I think one thing that really needs to change is to limit the # of open buys a vendor/artisan can have open any any given time. I think 3 is more than enough. If a vendor still has 3 open buys, limited human resources to get those buys out, and STILL starts more buys, that is nothing but a slap in the face to those who have participated in those previous buys as it will only add more time and delays to their orders. Another solution would be to require time to completion on the buys, but that is obviously a dumb idea. Buys often hit snags well outside of the control of the vendors here. But, by limiting the # of active buys a vendor can have GH would essentially be protecting the vendors by making them finish what they start and not over estimate their time or ability to get items out, as well as the buyers, by hopefully keeping time to receiving their items to a minimum.
I also think having a feedback thread in their forums for feedback, that the vendors themselves can't edit, would be beneficial. In my earlier thoughts, I thought having an anonymous feedback system would be good, as there is a degree of people being afraid to leave negative feedback for various reasons. Policing and proving the legitimacy of the anonymous system would be a nightmare though. Having a thread where customers could leave their feedback, and the vendors could chime in when needed seems like the best bet, but making sure the vendors can just delete threads they don't like would be key here.
I don't think any of these rules are too strict, especially when the sub forum will only be helping them out.
I agree with most of it except for limiting the number of buys. How are the moderators to determine whether or not a vendor is capable of running multiple buys? Some people may be unable to handle just one, while other, more experience individuals/groups could probably handle five or more.
I dont think a group here, outside companys like Massdrop, have ever managed to successfully juggle 5 group buys, AND deliver them all on time to 100% completion. Yes, the idea is rough, and very few simple ideas will be able to encapsulate everyone running group buys on the same level.
Other ideas like making vendors guess a date of completion, and then freezing further group buys if more than 2 previous one are cuttently "overdue" could also work.
The simple issue is a few vendors start more group buys than they finish it seems like, and this is a problem when you have an official sub forum imo. Vendors not ok with this could always opt out of having an official sub forum
That does sound fair. I've not been around long enough to see the failure any/or delay of any group buys, but I have heard about them. I'm surprised anyone simply accepts the excuses or just lack of communication from those hosting the buy. I suppose this is a hobby with infinite patience on the community's end and few choices when it comes to group buys.
It's really not a matter of "accepting excuses".
Say an organizer says there will be delays because of X reason. You are fed up with delays, so you choose to not "accept" this delay. What do you do? You are on the other side of the Internet from someone you do not know personally, on a website that is not designed or intended to primarily be a place to sell wares. You express distaste, but come across as impatient or needy. Backlash ensues. People fight over how much time is appropriate to wait before complaining. All the while the organizer is still working on the project (benefit of the doubt) and simply needs more time. How does the outburst help?
Reviews and feedback are very helpful, I can't and wouldn't question that. But there are plenty of scenarios where waiting is indeed the best course of action.
I disagree with none of this, and very much shows why this is such a difficult thing to find a good balance with.
before this system is finalized, where can I post how I was scammed by a gh user?
Ditto. My biggest gripe is communication. X person promises or states that communication/updates are going to be announced daily but continues to ignore what was stated.. Common it takes like a minute to post on geekhack there should be absolutely no excuse for lack of communication.As User18 mentioned, this thread included both issues with Classifieds as well as Vendors. I would like to explicitly point out that the ideas and issues below are specifically related to vendors with their own official GeekHack sub forums, and these ideas and thoughts are only pertaining to those vendors/individuals and not any other group. I just want to avoid any possible confusion here
I think that when GeekHack Mods give a sub forum to a Vendor/Artisan that they are endorsing them in an official capacity. From the eyes of new members that may not be completely aware of who the vendors are, or what their reputation is, or how long they have been around, seeing a sub forum for a particular vendor/artisan service will inevitably give them the impression that they are a solid and trusted seller. Obviously GH is not responsible in any way for the actions of the vendors, but I think that when an official sub forum is given to a vendor, some additional rules should apply, especially because it will only help their business.
I think one thing that really needs to change is to limit the # of open buys a vendor/artisan can have open any any given time. I think 3 is more than enough. If a vendor still has 3 open buys, limited human resources to get those buys out, and STILL starts more buys, that is nothing but a slap in the face to those who have participated in those previous buys as it will only add more time and delays to their orders. Another solution would be to require time to completion on the buys, but that is obviously a dumb idea. Buys often hit snags well outside of the control of the vendors here. But, by limiting the # of active buys a vendor can have GH would essentially be protecting the vendors by making them finish what they start and not over estimate their time or ability to get items out, as well as the buyers, by hopefully keeping time to receiving their items to a minimum.
I also think having a feedback thread in their forums for feedback, that the vendors themselves can't edit, would be beneficial. In my earlier thoughts, I thought having an anonymous feedback system would be good, as there is a degree of people being afraid to leave negative feedback for various reasons. Policing and proving the legitimacy of the anonymous system would be a nightmare though. Having a thread where customers could leave their feedback, and the vendors could chime in when needed seems like the best bet, but making sure the vendors can just delete threads they don't like would be key here.
I don't think any of these rules are too strict, especially when the sub forum will only be helping them out.
I agree with most of it except for limiting the number of buys. How are the moderators to determine whether or not a vendor is capable of running multiple buys? Some people may be unable to handle just one, while other, more experience individuals/groups could probably handle five or more.
I dont think a group here, outside companys like Massdrop, have ever managed to successfully juggle 5 group buys, AND deliver them all on time to 100% completion. Yes, the idea is rough, and very few simple ideas will be able to encapsulate everyone running group buys on the same level.
Other ideas like making vendors guess a date of completion, and then freezing further group buys if more than 2 previous one are cuttently "overdue" could also work.
The simple issue is a few vendors start more group buys than they finish it seems like, and this is a problem when you have an official sub forum imo. Vendors not ok with this could always opt out of having an official sub forum
That does sound fair. I've not been around long enough to see the failure any/or delay of any group buys, but I have heard about them. I'm surprised anyone simply accepts the excuses or just lack of communication from those hosting the buy. I suppose this is a hobby with infinite patience on the community's end and few choices when it comes to group buys.
It's really not a matter of "accepting excuses".
Say an organizer says there will be delays because of X reason. You are fed up with delays, so you choose to not "accept" this delay. What do you do? You are on the other side of the Internet from someone you do not know personally, on a website that is not designed or intended to primarily be a place to sell wares. You express distaste, but come across as impatient or needy. Backlash ensues. People fight over how much time is appropriate to wait before complaining. All the while the organizer is still working on the project (benefit of the doubt) and simply needs more time. How does the outburst help?
Reviews and feedback are very helpful, I can't and wouldn't question that. But there are plenty of scenarios where waiting is indeed the best course of action.
I disagree with none of this, and very much shows why this is such a difficult thing to find a good balance with.
I disagree with everything said here
Ditto. My biggest gripe is communication. X person promises or states that communication/updates are going to be announced daily but continues to ignore what was stated.. Common it takes like a minute to post on geekhack there should be absolutely no excuse for lack of communication.That does sound fair. I've not been around long enough to see the failure any/or delay of any group buys, but I have heard about them. I'm surprised anyone simply accepts the excuses or just lack of communication from those hosting the buy. I suppose this is a hobby with infinite patience on the community's end and few choices when it comes to group buys.
It's really not a matter of "accepting excuses".
Say an organizer says there will be delays because of X reason. You are fed up with delays, so you choose to not "accept" this delay. What do you do? You are on the other side of the Internet from someone you do not know personally, on a website that is not designed or intended to primarily be a place to sell wares. You express distaste, but come across as impatient or needy. Backlash ensues. People fight over how much time is appropriate to wait before complaining. All the while the organizer is still working on the project (benefit of the doubt) and simply needs more time. How does the outburst help?
Reviews and feedback are very helpful, I can't and wouldn't question that. But there are plenty of scenarios where waiting is indeed the best course of action.
I disagree with none of this, and very much shows why this is such a difficult thing to find a good balance with.
I disagree with everything said here