Commercialism vs. Community

[hoggy]

The way I think of it is somewhat like this -

Do we want a community where most if not all members would happily help others out for free, or almost free.  Trading, listing great finds on craigslist or ebay, that sort of thing.

Or, would we prefer a forum where we could buy novelty keycaps, and then post pictures of them and not much else.

Both are extreme ends of the scale (and not all that likely).  I've seen geekhack move from somewhere close to the first scenario, to closer to the second. Geekhack now and then is fine with me, but I'd rather see a slow down in the direction it's taking - I don't want it to hit the barriers, so to speak.

[keyboardlover]

in defense of sth, markets don't only work unregulated. that's total claptrap. every successful market-based system is a hybrid in which regulation attempts to make up for deficiencies in the market algorithm and actions of realistic, non-ideal players. recall that even in a perfectly ideal case with rational actors and ignoring time to convergence, the simple market algorithm is only pareto, or locally, optimal.

Name one successful hybrid market-based system in the world today.

So the whole point is, yes people are different, yes they are going to disagree, but that's exactly WHY you want to give people the freedom to vote with their dollar. Regulating/controlling a market means that the consumer will always get screwed. Guillaume and sth have complained that they feel they are getting screwed because prices are so high - ok, so don't buy those items! You have determined that pricing is too high to you, ok, so don't buy the ****ing product! I can't determine what pricing makes sense for either of you, nor for anyone else on this forum, so the only way you can control the market is buy voting with your dollars! So you won't be able to afford all the items you want: fine! You can accept, like I have, the fact that life is inherently filled with risk!

Do we want a community where most if not all members would happily help others out for free, or almost free.  Trading, listing great finds on craigslist or ebay, that sort of thing.

Or, would we prefer a forum where we could buy novelty keycaps, and then post pictures of them and not much else.

No one can determine the community that EVERYONE on here wants: that's the whole point. Members should be free to voluntarily associate with the community in the way that makes sense for them. And if anyone else doesn't like the way another member is associating, they are disrespecting that member's freedom to associate here. Now of course, the community has rules which we all voluntarily agree to abide here in respect for the greater community. Hey, if you don't like it, no one is forcing you to stay here! Respect everyone's freedom to associate here in the way that makes sense for them, and you will have a happy and successful community, period.

In conclusion, there are only two different types of people on Geekhack: those who want to be left alone, and those who simply will not leave them alone.

[Krogenar]

in defense of sth, markets don't only work unregulated. that's total claptrap. every successful market-based system is a hybrid in which regulation attempts to make up for deficiencies in the market algorithm and actions of realistic, non-ideal players. recall that even in a perfectly ideal case with rational actors and ignoring time to convergence, the simple market algorithm is only pareto, or locally, optimal.

Agreed. But I don't think anyone is suggesting no regulation of any kind, or a completely Wild West -style market. As I said, the market should be free of fraud. The right to buy and sell is not an absolute right. In an absolutely free market, I could sell my organs, children, etc. -- the community as a whole can and should set some basic outlines. But what sth suggests is this:

any attempt to self-regulate by means of forcing sellers to drop their prices could conceivably work in the short term. but that will only last until a compromise of those ideals is made by somebody who does not ascribe to them, most likely because they don't feel any obligation to the framework that allows them to pursue their hobby as it exists.

(emphasis added by me)

I'm not trying to hurt anyone's feelings, but -- 'forcing sellers to drop their prices' goes far beyond setting up basic guidelines of behavior (requiring accurate photos, well-lit photos, maintaining a positive heatware rating, whatever) and to me constitutes a colossal mistake. Price setting goes beyond regulation of the market and would instead distort it. But likely people would just leave the forum and go someplace else. The items would still be sold at prices that upset some people, it just wouldn't happen here.

My guess Mkawa is that you didn't set up this forum to become a marketplace cop -- I would feel the same way.

How to police a marketplace? I would consider forum tools of some kind, something along the lines of an integrated 'heatware' system. There's already (if I recall correctly) a way to 'ignore' particular forum members? So the tools are already in place, to some degree. You can't stand a member who sells for too high a price because it offends you sensibilities? Well, hit the ignore button. Problem solved.

of course in reality, we don't have anything like a perfect world, so we can't even establish or run ideal markets, which means we can't even close to rely on any theoretical proof of even pareto-optimality. in this sense, sth is completely correct.

I read what sth wrote and it seemed to me that he wanted to pursue an ideal of some sort -- or at least bemoaned the fact that the market is not perfect. My point is yours -- markets aren't ideal, and never will be. But markets are still a natural outgrowth of most communities, and therefore natural, normal and worthy of protection -- despite being imperfect. As for pareto-optimality -- it only holds when certain impossible assumptions are made (that all goods are marketable, etc.). It also holds to the zero-sum fallacy -- that one cannot gain economically without somehow harming another person in the market; i.e. that wealth (in the sense of keyboards and their accoutrements) is static, and cannot be created. In my experience, that simply is not the case. The concept is that all wealth (keyboards, what have you) is set, like pieces of a pizza pie. So if some people get more slices, that means everyone else must share what remains. But the facts paint a very different picture.

For example: I see a lot of barter, I see people selling custom accessories (Mimic cables), polish keycaps, assembly services. I see a growing, vibrant marketplace. I see people selling keyboards that they've expertly cleaned and refurbished and repaired. This is undeniably good for the hobby. There's altruism, too, but generally when something becomes profitable you get more of it. If interest in mechanical keyboards grows (which may or may not have anything to do with GH) that means more manufacturers taking an interest in an emerging market. Why would we be afraid of that?

in defense of krogenar and others, we have to face the fact that we live in a system in which there is currency, goods, pricing, and it's almost impossible to just decide on an optimal set of prices from on high at all points in time. we are all individuals here, with limited information, back by a variety of resources and amounts of those resources, and ultimately what comes out of this is some kind of marketplace, in the most colloquial sense of the word. hence, we have to think about how to make this market better for everyone, and in some cases this is going to mean stepping back and letting stuff happen. if Alice really really wants something from Bob, and Alice has a lot of something (CASH MONEY) that Bob really wants, there is very little we can do to stop Alice from exchanging large amounts of resources for an asset of Bob's. If the transaction doesn't happen on geekhack, it will happen on DT, or BT, or HF, or any of the other practically uncountably many places on the web.

Agreed.

[Krogenar]

I believe Demik once said something about GH turning in some kind of "Look at me, I have bigger e-pennis than you" kind of forum. He didn't tell it with those words but that was the point if I remember correctly. People in this forum is no longer interested in the Hobby. They just want to collect the most expensive items and share the pictures in Geekhack Media subforum to compare their e-pennis size.

I don't know if that's true or not, but even if it were... so what? Can you demonstrate how this harms your freedom to discuss, share knowledge, etc.? I think it harms your sensibilities and upsets you perhaps, but that's not actual harm.

User 1 : Hey look my new Skull arrived[shows picture of a skull]
User 2 : Oh boy your collection sucks[shows picture with TONS of skulls]
User 3: Both of your collections suck because I've received a Box [shows picture of a box]
User 1: WOWOWOWO! (He's excited because he has shown a Box) Where can I buy that box?

I respectfully submit to you guilleguillaume that a free and open community allows for stupidity, so long as it does no actual harm. Your rights begin where mine end. And if forum members engage in discussions that we find useless and/or stupid we are under no obligation to participate. Ignore them if they upset you so much. How would you regulate people's discussions guilleguillaume? A stupid-meter of some kind? I can't think of any serious way to do it.

The only reason a lot of  users are joining this forum it's because it has become popular to own mechanical keyboards. Some time ago they even looked at us like those rare "keyboards geeks" that spend 100$ in a keyboard and doesn't even have a colourful screen or shiny leds and made laugh of that. Now some of them are joining GH and the only way they see to adapt to this community is by buying expensive items to show that they're worth of this forum. For this reason GH derailed to a Marketplace where people seems excited with the single idea of buying/selling in mind. Sharing finds has started to be something really rare. The only idea of organising something for free or manage GB without earning money makes some people sick. They only care for $$$$$$$$$, I can see their faces:

So mechanical keyboards have become popular, and now... what? You're upset that new people are entering the hobby and not giving you the respect you think you've earned? Seniority should have its privileges? Economic privileges? Feels to me that you're mocking these people for being new to the hobby and having the temerity to (gasp) buy things! It's shades of the hipster barista meme -- once he hears a musician's work on the radio (public is now aware of artist) he immediately deletes their entire discography from his iPod. Again, I'm not attacking you, just your position. If you think people are all about the $$$$$ then by all means don't do business with them.

I'm not saying that every single user that joined GH recently is like that, I've been a noob too but not that kind of noob, at least I was interested in learning something in the forums and share knowledge. I've never been interested in making money here in Geekhack like some are.

I see. You were a better class of keyboard nerd noob. I dunno, am I crazy? I am detecting a lot of elitism from the anti-marketplace crowd. How do you really know that the new class of forum members are not interested in learning and sharing knowledge?

It's nice to see that there is still some great people left (Old and new) but reading some posts in this thread and some other threads makes me think If It would be better to stay out of this forum for a while and see if the attitude changes.

People always declare that they're moving out of the country if a particular political party wins/loses, etc. Hardly ever happens. But you have every right to do so. But you should know I sure don't feel threatened if an elitist snob threatens to leave a community. But they rarely ever do -- being a scold is too enriching an experience, apparently.

I can remember those days were Click Clack keys were in stock for weeks on EK without being sold because people thought they were expensive. Now people has changed their mind and it seems that  the more you pay for something the more it's worth it like if you were receiving badges for buying items at ultra-expensive prices.

This is the same reason that people buy Ferrari's -- to show people how cool they are. That's human nature, and it's not going to change. But again -- we are under no obligation to participate, so where's the harm?

[hashbaz]

I feel like all this market talk is beside the point.  The issue for me is not rights and efficiencies, but the flavor of the community.  If geekhack is a place where clacks purchased on EK for $30 are resold immediately for > $100, the sense of community diminishes IMO.  Don't you dare tell me that I sound like a sour old fart who can't afford clacks, because I don't give a damn about them, per se.

mkawa still said it best in his head-fi vs. neogaf post.

[longweight]

I can't imagine how CC's can be sold in a way that keeps everyone here happy, this is mainly due to the way that CC runs his business.

[keyboardlover]

The reality is that market forces can ever ONLY be controlled effectively by consumers. Regulation simply creates extremely lucrative black markets. Accept and embrace that, and the community can work effectively with markets.

[Krogenar]

I feel like all this market talk is beside the point.  The issue for me is not rights and efficiencies, but the flavor of the community.  If geekhack is a place where clacks purchased on EK for $30 are resold immediately for > $100, the sense of community diminishes IMO.

I honestly don't see how that diminishes the 'sense of community'. Let's say that people bought the CCs from EK for $30 and then resold them a month or two later (tired of the CC, needs to fund purchase of something else, etc.) and they choose to sell for $30 -- does the 'sense of community' remain unharmed? More importantly, would the 'sense of community' be enhanced if he gave the CC away for free?

For me, market talk is crucial to this discussion because it speaks to human interaction. Who knew (with certainty) that CCs were going to become wildly popular? Whenever anyone makes a purchase, they're taking a risk. They're trying to recoup that risk-taking when they resell it. The feeling I get is that some people at GH experience a kind of anaphylactic shock when someone makes (to their eyes) an unseemly profit.

I agree with you hashbaz, that the 'flavor' of the community can change, and that can make people uncomfortable. Another analogue to this is zoning laws. For example, a local community has zoning laws to maintain the 'flavor' of a neighborhood.

Zoning Board: "I'm sorry sir, but our zoning laws prohibit you from building a gentleman's club ("Krog's Boobie Bungalow, Coming in November 2013!") next to the elementary school."
Krogenar: "Aww, c'mon!"

And that makes sense, but it can be taken too far. It would be wrong to outlaw my gentlemen's club outright, as I am harming no one and breaking no laws, and I could build it someplace else in the community, where it would be appreciated. But to say I could not build my boobie bungalow at all, anywhere, that would be unfair.

Also, the CC phenomena (buy low, sell very, very high) is a reflection of the market. Let's imagine that ClackFactory decided to make 5,000 of every kind of CC out there, and people could buy as many as they wanted. He would probably have achieved market saturation -- everyone who wanted a CC would have one, generally. But from what I see, he doesn't make very many of them. Yet no one attacks him (not should they.) Or, maybe EK should sell them for $150 and be done with it. Maybe ClackFactory requires them to sell for $30 a piece? I don't know.

Don't you dare tell me that I sound like a sour old fart who can't afford clacks, because I don't give a damn about them, per se.

I'll gladly promise not to accuse you of being a sour old fart. I don't think any of the anti-profit members would agree to not denigrate people who are attempting to make a profit as evil, greedy bastards who don't care about the community. I'm not a seller, so I have no vested interest, and I have not purchased anything through GH either. Not that that should have any effect on the strength of our arguments. Also, these sellers aren't likely to defend themselves, so, being the hero that I am (stop laughing) I will speak for them.  (assumes Superman pose)

[longweight]

It is always going to be like this, I don't really think that there is anything to do or get wound up about.

[Alessandro]

Pretty much. This is a great read, however, and Krogenar has made some excellent points in my opinion.

[jdcarpe]

I think the one thing that could help the community the most would be to simply allow threadcrapping in the marketplace, within the limits of respectful conversation. It's one thing to say, "Hey, I just sold that same keyboard for $20 less, yours might sell faster at that price;" and another to say, "Quit being such a douchebag with your high prices!" If personal attacks are moderated without bias or the need for explanation, I think a little threadcrapping can be a good thing. That's how the marketplace works on DT, and it seems to work well.

If you are someone who sells things often using our classifieds forum, and you want threadcrapping to continue to be disallowed, please use this thread to explain your position.

On the subject of auctions, I have said before that I believe auctions should always be handled off-site. eBay has protections setup for buyer and seller, and their bidding system is well-known. GH as a forum doesn't have the resources to deal with auctions.

[Krogenar]

Pretty much. This is a great read, however, and Krogenar has made some excellent points in my opinion.

(takes thick wad of cash from Alessandro)  Glad I could be of service! (rubs hands together greedily)

Just kidding. Thank you for the comment Alessandro. I looked at your caps, and to be honest, they're not my cup of tea -- at all. But I heartily endorse your business and hope you sell lots of keycaps and make an avalanche of money and become a tremendous financial success. Sorry about the "European minx" comment earlier on the thread -- I hope your profits are used to purchase trophy husbands of your choice. (Assuming you are female, apologies if I am mistaken.) And feel free to roll around in pound notes.

Apologies also for attempting to suck all the oxygen from the thread. This is a favorite topic of mine.

[longweight]

But why is there a need to post it in the thread? Just send a PM stating that the price might be dropped to sell, who cares if someone thinks that the price is too high? If it is then the item won't sell and the seller might drop the price.

[reaper]

I think the one thing that could help the community the most would be to simply allow threadcrapping in the marketplace, within the limits of respectful conversation. It's one thing to say, "Hey, I just sold that same keyboard for $20 less, yours might sell faster at that price;" and another to say, "Quit being such a douchebag with your high prices!" If personal attacks are moderated without bias or the need for explanation, I think a little threadcrapping can be a good thing. That's how the marketplace works on DT, and it seems to work well.

If you are someone who sells things often using our classifieds forum, and you want threadcrapping to continue to be disallowed, please use this thread to explain your position.

There is a whole other thread pertaining to that discussion, actually.


http://geekhack.org/index.php?topic=39480.0

[rek55]

Case in point being sherryton and Originative - the community spoke up and he responded in a positive way.

TL;DR: there is a way for commercialism and community to live together in harmony.

Hmmm.  As a person who missed the window between his web pre-launch and the great hullabaloo after which it came down, I'll buy that the on-topic feedback worked for the positive.  And that this thread seems a useful discussion.  I don't think that having this discussion in the "great finds" thread about his site was helpful to the community.  As someone interested in keyboards and keycaps, I wanted to at least SEE what was up with the new site.  But what I found was this discussion instead.

I am here because I am interested in keyboards and keycaps, but mostly keyboards.  I like the aesthetics of a nice PBT or DS set of keycaps with some novelty keys tossed in for looks.  I don't have a CC key because I don't see the value, and only have a single anthropomorphic keycap because MMB had a closeout sale and I got a gasmask 'cap for under twenty bucks.  But I've bought a bunch of stuff from Techkeys, Imsto and WASD, and most of my keyboards from classifieds and great finds here.

I'm not a vendor, but I have started a few buys for items that I - personally - couldn't find anywhere else, and thought the community needed to have.  I didn't spend thirty grand on an MOQ for Cherry-mold keycaps, but I did spend more than a few bucks getting media keys custom-made so I would have something to show on a group buy.  (Sign up for those, please!)  And if any of my group buys ever makes it to the point of having leftover cash, I'll donate it to GH.  But that is because I have another job that pays my rent and keeps my kids fed and clothed.

And except for scale, I don't see a difference between putting up a few hundred bucks to make something available and putting up a few (many) thousands to make something bigger available.  Except perhaps courage.

Sherryton the person has signed up for a damn Elvish keyboard; Sherryton's enterprises have made it possible for me and others to have things we wouldn't otherwise have.  Sherryton the person posts, runs group buys, helps other people make group buys, and is generally courteous to everyone here.  Sherryton's enterprise has -- in the longest recession in recorded history -- invested significant coin in actually having something made that we can choose to buy.

Large German plastics firms don't invest in obsolete tooling unless they have a market.  Entrepreneurs don't invest in product unless they can cover their costs and maybe make a buck for the effort.  And unless we want to be a community of people who sell each other old pieces of plastic harvested from old keyboards, we need companies, entrepreneurs and individuals who are willing to take risks on our behalf.

In my personal opinion, there is room for both the slow, low-cost group buy path and the commercial path.  Both are helpful to this community.  Sherryton has paid his dues here, and continues (I hope) to comment and contribute.  And right now, at this very moment, HE has more money on the line with those keycap sets than anyone else.

Good for him.  And thanks as well.

Now I am going to go check to see if his site is back up.  I'd really like to see that Olivetti set.

Peace and harmony, y'all,

 - Ron | samwisekoi

Show Image

This was so well said, and seems to have been subsequently ignored. I'm on board with Mr. samwisekoi.

[jdcarpe]

But why is there a need to post it in the thread? Just send a PM stating that the price might be dropped to sell, who cares if someone thinks that the price is too high? If it is then the item won't sell and the seller might drop the price.

To keep sellers honest. To inform new members who may not know, of the usual price. As long as it is handles in a respectful manner.

[Krogenar]

I think the one thing that could help the community the most would be to simply allow threadcrapping in the marketplace, within the limits of respectful conversation. It's one thing to say, "Hey, I just sold that same keyboard for $20 less, yours might sell faster at that price;" and another to say, "Quit being such a douchebag with your high prices!" If personal attacks are moderated without bias or the need for explanation, I think a little threadcrapping can be a good thing. That's how the marketplace works on DT, and it seems to work well.

I think that's a good idea, but might be tough on moderators. Who's to determine what is or is not theadcrapping? One person's threadcrap is another person's useful advice, right? I'd rather see some kind of forumwide Karma system in place. Threadcrap too often (or accuse people of threadcrapping to often) and your reputation (karma, or what have you) suffers. Then the mods wouldn't have to get involved with every little fracas. Maybe if your karma gets too low with a particular person, your posts become invisible to them; self-regulating, to some degree. Limit karma up- or down-votes to one per person, per day to keep GH from becoming Reddit and limit abuse.

On the subject of auctions, I have said before that I believe auctions should always be handled off-site. eBay has protections setup for buyer and seller, and their bidding system is well-known. GH as a forum doesn't have the resources to deal with auctions.

Awesome, awesome idea. Also, eBay does allow for private auctions, so you could have people sign up through GH to be auctioneers and still keep it 'in the community' in some way. Great idea, jdcarpe.

[jdcarpe]

I think the one thing that could help the community the most would be to simply allow threadcrapping in the marketplace, within the limits of respectful conversation. It's one thing to say, "Hey, I just sold that same keyboard for $20 less, yours might sell faster at that price;" and another to say, "Quit being such a douchebag with your high prices!" If personal attacks are moderated without bias or the need for explanation, I think a little threadcrapping can be a good thing. That's how the marketplace works on DT, and it seems to work well.

I think that's a good idea, but might be tough on moderators. Who's to determine what is or is not theadcrapping? One person's threadcrap is another person's useful advice, right?

That's exactly the point of the other thread reaper mentioned in his reply. Positive comments are currently left in the thread, but negative comments are removed. Either remove both or none. The only time I think moderators should be involved is when someone personally attacks the seller. Comments about price and the item for sale should be left, regardless of whether the seller wants them in his thread or not.

[longweight]

If you allow thread crapping then you will start getting a lot more of the PM only locked threads.

[jdcarpe]

Then members shouldn't have the ability to lock threads. Only mods and admins.

[longweight]

Where do you draw the line then? When does a negative comment become trolling?

[jdcarpe]

At personal attacks. If someone is trolling the seller because of a personal (perhaps mutual) dislike, the other forum members are going to recognize that for what it is. Makes the troll look bad, actually, and not the other way around.

[mashby]

Really, really good discussion. If I can summarize thus far...

Those of us that have no problems with the commercial aspect of the community take little issue with the current "balance" of GeekHack. Those that do take issue have two primary concerns:

1. Members more focused on consumerism (look what I bought/have)
2. Companies leveraging (taking advantage) the community for their benefit.

What I find interesting about these two points is that they both relate to member/consumer demand. For example, since CC are rare and unique items, they've become highly desired my many in the community and thus their price has skyrocketed. Not everyone sees the value in these keycaps, but there is clearly a large majority that do. Scarcity is what is driving demand. Yet if you trace the roots of GeekHack, you'll find that it was founded on this very same principal of scarcity. The difference is that it was scarcity of information.

I've only been a member of the community for a couple of months, but it would appear that the success and/or draw of GeekHack is feeding this into a cyclical process. As more people learn about the benefits of a mechanical keyboard, more people will find GeekHack. The more people that become members, demand for products and services will increase. As demand increases, companies will see an opportunity to provide a good, or service in order to make a profit.

So a new question...

If commercialism is inevitable then should the goal be to provide more information to level the scales? If the answer is yes, then how do we do that?

[longweight]

I don't think that the market place is broken so I don't see any need to change it.

[hashbaz]

I honestly don't see how that diminishes the 'sense of community'. Let's say that people bought the CCs from EK for $30 and then resold them a month or two later (tired of the CC, needs to fund purchase of something else, etc.) and they choose to sell for $30 -- does the 'sense of community' remain unharmed? More importantly, would the 'sense of community' be enhanced if he gave the CC away for free?

The sense of community is diminished when people take advantage of the system, and each other.  You can argue that it's just economics and it's inevitable, and that the system is at fault, and all that may be true.  But it's beside the point.  Friends don't rip each other off.  They don't snatch up limited merchandise from their peers with the intention of profiting from it rather than enjoying it.  If we're ripping each other off then we're not a community.

[longweight]

Sadly there is only one man that can stop that.

[jdcarpe]

Maybe you don't think so, but there are plenty of members here that do think the current rules need to be modified.

If you can post any valid reasons why threadcrapping in the classifieds is inherently bad, I'll be happy to consider them. But simply stating that you like it the way it is doesn't cut it. Too many people are unhappy with the direction this forum is taking. Note at least two threads full of comments discussing it, and comments dominating other threads.

[longweight]

1. It clutters up a thread which is about selling an item, muddling up genuine comments with a random conversation.
2. It can take over a FS thread and massively derail it.
3. It doesn't help is anyway, the thread is about advertising an item for sale. If someone thinks that the price or information is wrong then they can send the seller a friendly PM. If the price is deemed unfair then I don't think that comes into it, someone might be willing to pay the price and that is their prerogative.

[jdcarpe]

1. It clutters up a thread which is about selling an item, muddling up genuine comments with a random conversation.

We're not talking about random conversation.  Most "threadcrapping" is comments pertaining to the item being sold.

2. It can take over a FS thread and massively derail it.

Thread only gets derailed if members start discussing something totally unrelated. Comments about the item for sale do not derail the thread. Hell, the seller gets free "bumps" by it.

3. It doesn't help is anyway, the thread is about advertising an item for sale. If someone thinks that the price or information is wrong then they can send the seller a friendly PM. If the price is deemed unfair then I don't think that comes into it, someone might be willing to pay the price and that is their prerogative.

It doesn't help in what way? Doesn't help the seller who can't answer questions regarding his item or its price? It certainly helps other members decide if something is a good value or a ripoff.

Just because someone is willing to pay an inflated price for an item doesn't make it right to profit off fellow members, who may be uninformed as to an item's value.

[Alessandro]

Keeping such discussions to threads like this is brilliant. Unlike suddenly posting in another thread, we're having a proper, neutral discussion rather then biased attacking.

However, I still believe in threadcrapping to an extent (you're all still more than welcome to do it to me by the way, I'm not bothered) as it can help "discuss" prices as such. It's only when it becomes a barrage of biased attacks that a line must be drawn.

*I'm an english minx, not a european one..

[longweight]

1. It clutters up a thread which is about selling an item, muddling up genuine comments with a random conversation.

We're not talking about random conversation.  Most "threadcrapping" is comments pertaining to the item being sold.

2. It can take over a FS thread and massively derail it.

Thread only gets derailed if members start discussing something totally unrelated. Comments about the item for sale do not derail the thread. Hell, the seller gets free "bumps" by it.

3. It doesn't help is anyway, the thread is about advertising an item for sale. If someone thinks that the price or information is wrong then they can send the seller a friendly PM. If the price is deemed unfair then I don't think that comes into it, someone might be willing to pay the price and that is their prerogative.

It doesn't help in what way? Doesn't help the seller who can't answer questions regarding his item or its price? It certainly helps other members decide if something is a good value or a ripoff.

Just because someone is willing to pay an inflated price for an item doesn't make it right to profit off fellow members, who may be uninformed as to an item's value.

If it isn't about the seller answering a question about the product for sale then it isn't necessary.


I don't think that there is any issue with the marketplace apart from CC sales and the whole painted caps malarkey.

[TheGreatAmphibianPling]

In the former case, I think the head-fi is THE canonical example of crass commercialization ruining a great community. Many years ago, when I was young and even stupider, I spent quite a bit of time on headwize and the earliest revisions of head-fi, learning to hack, building stuff, and generally having a grand old time. In those heady days, open source designs, cooperation, civility, and support for new users were the principles by which the community lived. Fast-forward 10 years, and now head-fi is a huge mess of advertisements for obfuscated implementations of circuits that have not changed in a decade and are described not without any sense of technical specificity but only with adjectives that appeal exclusively to emotion. Further, the userbase seems to be stuck in a horrible cycle of buying and selling these heavily advertised products while arguing about exactly which appeals to emotion are best. Meanwhile, all the hackers seem to have moved on, and I can find no evidence that the forum is able to incubate or produce cool community projects anymore..

It's worse than that: Head-Fi banned the last really knowledgeable poster there - an electronics engineer who has released excellent open source amp designs - after he discovered that one of their sponsor's amps was not only very good ***but tended to destroy headphones:***

http://nwavguy.blogspot.co.uk/2011/07/banned-at-head-fi.html

The best part: the amp maker's name is.... Schiit.

[samwisekoi]

How about a "Limited Edition" run of PBT dye-sub litster smiley keys?  Say 50-100 max, each numbered like lithographs?


Original Art

SP has DCS ‐ 1X ROW 1 ‐ YELLOW (YBX) in inventory, so we'd only need to get them printed up.

Or perhaps litster could contribute to the community by making each one special and unique?  Then perhaps a Dutch auction in benefit of GH?

Yo litster: I'll buy the keycaps and mange the auction if you'll do the customization!  (Seriously.)

 - Ron | samwisekoi

[Krogenar]

I've only been a member of the community for a couple of months, but it would appear that the success and/or draw of GeekHack is feeding this into a cyclical process. As more people learn about the benefits of a mechanical keyboard, more people will find GeekHack. The more people that become members, demand for products and services will increase. As demand increases, companies will see an opportunity to provide a good, or service in order to make a profit.

I don't know that we can assume that GH itself as a forum is causing the increased interest in mechanical keyboards. Is GH going to benefit from that surge in interest -- it could. And I think that's where people's opinions are diverging. Some people don't like a lot of new people showing up and changing the 'flavor' of the forum. Sounds quite a lot like the gentrification phenomena.
(see here for details: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gentrification)

So a new question...
If commercialism is inevitable then should the goal be to provide more information to level the scales? If the answer is yes, then how do we do that?

A community focused on something that is a consumer product (keyboards) is inevitably going to want to trade, barter and engage in financial transactions. I agree completely that more speech (information) is the answer. To keep the mods sane, the tools should be available to everyone and members shouldn't expect mods to intervene except in the most outrageous situations. That is; the community should police itself for the most part, with mods and the forum owner maintaining the most open guidelines allowable.

I don't think that the market place is broken so I don't see any need to change it.

I don't think it's broken (as far as I can see -- again, never bought or sold anything via GH) but that doesn't mean the worries of other members should be ignored or that the market cannot be improved. Commercialism can be crass. Case in point: I'm a Penn State graduate. I went to the main campus for four years and can say without a doubt that football is everything. I quickly got the sense that Penn State (while being a great school) was a football team with a university attached to it. Football players got special perks and dispensations that other non-athlete students did not. It irked me, but overall the system worked.

Controlling pricing from members is not going to work -- but maybe the forum could use a bit more segmentation. Make a subform solely dedicated to keyboard epeen measuring so that the members who cannot abide it don't have to see it. Call it the 'Show Me Your E-Peen' subforum.

Ultimately, I think there should be a Karma system so that buyers and sellers can rate one another. It should not be anonymous and it should be a part of the public record. Believe it or not, it's not always the supplier that gets 'fired'. Sometimes buyers get fired. If you go into multiple restaurants, get upset with the meal in each place constantly, and protest by defecating on the tables of those restaurants, you will eventually become persona non grata just about everywhere, and even other restaurant patrons will start to get the picture that those people are just impossible to please and their opinions should be ignored.

If there's a potential consequence for not being forthright as a seller, or being even-tempered as a buyer, then people are more likely to behave like adults. Moderating all that behavior would be a logistical nightmare, so empower the community to do it itself. How many times have you seen an eBay seller with 99% approval, and one person who hated the experience? You chalk it up to a fluke or an accident. Give the 'knowledge is everything' clique a karma rating for knowledge, etc. and give the people who wish to allow a free market a market Karma rating.

As for people starting business ventures, let them, but make it all transparent and above board. I've seen comments in which people are very upset that a moderator or admin was making a profit, and then that person having to defend their actions. My solution is far simpler -- be honest enough to acknowledge that we're not all altruists and it's okay. Everything is a transaction in one form or another. When I first came to GH it was for information. I got it. What did the suppliers get from this transaction? Some people will proclaim "Nothing! You gave them nothing you bastard!"

Not true. I gave them my thanks -- and they got to demonstrate their knowledge and know that their expertise was of use to someone else. Is that self-centered, in a sense? Sure, but everyone got what they wanted, so why the panty twistedness? Even social interactions are transactions of a sort. Self-interest is the norm (and it's a spectrum) -- pure altruism is the exception. We shouldn't build a community based on faking altruism. That would be like an engineer building a machine that ignored gravity on ethical grounds. Gravity makes people fall down, makes women's breasts sag, down with gravity! Let's build a machine that puts gravity in its place -- no place!

Madness. Make gravity work for the community, harness it, and don't expect it to be flawless. And treat it with the respect and caution it deserves.

So 'monetize' these interactions with Karma. Someone helps you with great advice, send them some Karma love so they can stand a little taller. If (from my perspective) a keyboard snob thinks your prices are too high, they should vote your seller score down. That's feedback for sellers and buyers. The seller can come up with some lame (to me) way of 'giving back' to the community (as though providing a product was not enough) and take more money from those people. I make scads of money in my own business from people whose political beliefs are loathsome to me and it is sweet, sweet nectar.

An example: there's a person who used to come into my store to buy my product. The price is set, but they always ask for $.75 less than what it is marked. My initial response was "This is not 'The Price is Right' -- that's the price." I lost the sale! Then I got wise. The next time someone like that walked in I raised the price by $.75 and let them haggle me down to ... the actual price! I deserved an Oscar. She claimed her husband would beat her if I charged her the full price. I moaned ala Benny from Total Recall ("Man... I got five kids ta feed!") To this day she comes in and demands her 'special price' (the normal price). I sigh and fake relent to her demands. The point is that getting the product was not good enough for her -- she needed to know in her heart that she had put me over a barrel pricewise. I gave her that happiness because that's what she needed. Was it deceptive? Sure, but she left happy. The happiness she felt was quite real. Is she a bad person for wanting that from me? No, she just has special needs.

So I think another good solution would be for GH-related startups to perform a similar 'community awareness' kabuki dance to placate the people who are horrified by the rampant commercialization. Some are probably already doing it. They'll deny it, though. I just long for some honesty, in all transactions. No more fake altruism, no more denials that people were trying to make a profit.

Apologies to kabuki dance enthusiasts, it is a noble cultural artform.

Also, Karma add-on for Simple Machines Forum:

http://wiki.simplemachines.org/smf/Karma

[longweight]

Oh I agree that I am not representative of everyone.

[Alessandro]

How about a "Limited Edition" run of PBT dye-sub litster smiley keys?  Say 50-100 max, each numbered like lithographs?

(Attachment Link)
Original Art

SP has DCS ‐ 1X ROW 1 ‐ YELLOW (YBX) in inventory, so we'd only need to get them printed up.

Or perhaps litster could contribute to the community by making each one special and unique?  Then perhaps a Dutch auction in benefit of GH?

Yo litster: I'll buy the keycaps and mange the auction if you'll do the customization!  (Seriously.)

 - Ron | samwisekoi

Show Image

Epic.

[TheGreatAmphibianPling]

There is only one way that the market approach can work in a community, and that is a completely un-regulated approach. That way markets aren't manipulated by authority and consumers can vote with their dollar.

Yeah, people should be free to sell food with additives that cause cancer - when their customers die 20 years later and their sales drop off they'll regret it!

But what they really SHOULD do is vote with their dollar - that's the only way consumers can control markets. If you don't like the pricing or the product or whatever then shut the **** up and don't buy it. Period.

Ok: why do you confuse the idea of an unregulated market with a a market WHERE SELLERS ARE FREE FROM CRITICISM? Apparently you don't know what regulation is, and you hate free speech... You also don't get  what an online community is - it's a place where people TALK about  the stuff  they buy and might might buy. If you are against that sharing of opinion, you are against the idea of there being a community.

[mkawa]

so much great food for thought here. just want to pop in for a second to refine what hash and i have been saying and i think others have been alluding to. another poster offered a simple dichotomy between us being a forum of junk collectors or a free-as-in-beer utopia (paraphrased), and i offered the dichotomy of head-fi vs neogaf...

to be clear, we are not going to become any of these things anytime soon (or ever!). for various reasons i don't see us becoming either head-fi or neogaf, either junk traders in some post-apocalyptic adspace-driven wasteland, nor will we ever be paradise where huge corporations are forced to support us by becoming part of the community and being heckled. what we will become is GEEKHACK, and what exactly that means is something for us to decide over the next five years. Every day, we are collectively deciding how money, material goods, and information plays a part in our community.

i know that one thing that that i've been thinking very hard about as i read this conversation is the notion of "threadcrapping" and the definitions we use to identify it in the marketplace forums. on the one hand, you should be allowed to post a classifieds ad without being personally insulted. on the other hand, i would be very sad if we became some kind of haven for plastic speculators.

personally, i like hacking; it's an integral part of who i am, and geekhack scratches that itch for me. i love the projects we work on as a community, and the information we discover by collectively experimenting with fabrication techniques, dissections of old designs, etc. but i'm not an old fart like hashbaz, and i actually also love the little blue clack on my realforce that i click on several hundred (thousands?) of thoroughly enjoyable times a day (vim, what the hell, are you in visual mode? GET OUT!). i also love building infrastructure that allows this community to thrive. but i am only one person in this community out of (as of this or last week, twenty thousand registered users (!!)). it's all of our actions that determine what geekhack becomes, and as hash said in his first post, active civil debate is a requirement for this to truly be a community-guided process.

anyway, before i pop out, i think mashby makes a good point in that there may be a scarcity of information causing the disconnect between some people's notion of how things should be priced and how much people are selling/buying them for. if so, is there something we can do as a community to try to fix this? does it need infrastructure support as well? maybe mashby and i are totally off base, and there's some other factor at play?

[keyboardlover]

Yeah, people should be free to sell food with additives that cause cancer - when their customers die 20 years later and their sales drop off they'll regret it!

Actually not only do I believe they should be free to sell what they want, but the worst thing abot regulation is it legitimizes that very issue, since you can't trust government bodies to regulate what is healthy or good for everyone. I have accepted the fact that life is filled with risk.

Ok: why do you confuse the idea of an unregulated market with a a market WHERE SELLERS ARE FREE FROM CRITICISM? Apparently you don't know what regulation is, and you hate free speech... You also don't get  what an online community is - it's a place where people TALK about  the stuff  they buy and might might buy. If you are against that sharing of opinion, you are against the idea of there being a community.

I was being sarcastic dude: honestly I don't care if sellers are criticized publicly. I am a huge fan of freedom of speech. No one is forced to buy OR sell here!

[Alessandro]

Or perhaps litster could contribute to the community by making each one special and unique?  Then perhaps a Dutch auction in benefit of GH?

Although on a side note to that, you're more than welcome to give Jdcarpe his $63 back if that's how you feel about auctions.

[sth]

I feel like all this market talk is beside the point.  The issue for me is not rights and efficiencies, but the flavor of the community.  If geekhack is a place where clacks purchased on EK for $30 are resold immediately for > $100, the sense of community diminishes IMO.  Don't you dare tell me that I sound like a sour old fart who can't afford clacks, because I don't give a damn about them, per se.

mkawa still said it best in his head-fi vs. neogaf post.

i get distracted easily, but this is the impetus behind my ranting. i would just prefer to be a part of a community that tends toward a mutually beneficial, more DIY/DIT focus rather than a place to show off your newest off-the-shelf keyboard with a flashy/expensive set of keys on it. i know that will always be a part of GH and i'm definitely not saying i never got into the 'visual' aspect, but i feel like emphasizing a cooperative vibe makes the community friendlier and encourages more creativity and experimentation.

[jdcarpe]

Or perhaps litster could contribute to the community by making each one special and unique?  Then perhaps a Dutch auction in benefit of GH?

Although on a side note to that, you're more than welcome to give Jdcarpe his $63 back if that's how you feel about auctions.

No one dislikes auctions on this site more than I. But that doesn't stop me from using one to donate to the site. I wouldn't take that money back (or any of the other money i have donated to the site) if they offered it. It's important to support this site financially, when one is able. Otherwise we will have stupid ads all over the place. Talk about commercialism vs. community.

[samwisekoi]

Or perhaps litster could contribute to the community by making each one special and unique?  Then perhaps a Dutch auction in benefit of GH?

Although on a side note to that, you're more than welcome to give Jdcarpe his $63 back if that's how you feel about auctions.

Wait, what?  I don't have Jdcarpe's $63, and I am cool with auctions.  (Jdcarpe, please tell me if I owe you money!)

I said Dutch Auction because (according to my understanding and Wikipedia):

However, all winning bidders need to pay only the lowest qualifying (successful) bid. If there are more successful bids than items available, priority goes to the bidders who submitted their bids first.

So if we had a Dutch auction, everyone would pay the lowest successful bid.  That seemed fairer to me, but any other format is ok as well.

Was I misunderstood or am I misunderstanding?

Seriously, I'll buy the blanks and if litster will do the artwork, all proceeds can go to GH.  Isn't that a good thing?

 - Ron | samwisekoi

[TheGreatAmphibianPling]

Yeah, people should be free to sell food with additives that cause cancer - when their customers die 20 years later and their sales drop off they'll regret it!

Actually not only do I believe they should be free to sell what they want, but the worst thing abot regulation is it legitimizes that very issue, since you can't trust government bodies to regulate what is healthy or good for everyone.

This makes no sense at all. It's like saying "Let's legalize murder, because we still have *some* of them even though we have cops." In fact, food safety and child labour laws have all been enormously effective over the past century, as have government standards to increase vehicle safety over the past couple of decades. And arguing that you can't trust "government bodies" is semantically meaningless - trust them to a -perfect job? Or a job that it us reasonably effective? If you can't define your ideas better than this, you really don't have any ideas - just things you say.

I have accepted the fact that life is filled with risk.

I doubt it. I suspect you have, by global standards, an unusually soft and well-cushioned life.

Ok: why do you confuse the idea of an unregulated market with a a market WHERE SELLERS ARE FREE FROM CRITICISM? Apparently you don't know what regulation is, and you hate free speech... You also don't get  what an online community is - it's a place where people TALK about  the stuff  they buy and might might buy. If you are against that sharing of opinion, you are against the idea of there being a community.

I was being sarcastic dude: honestly I don't care if sellers are criticized publicly.

The problem here is that the sarcastic thing was less insane than the non-sarcastically meant thing...

[sth]

I have accepted the fact that life is filled with risk.

I doubt it. I suspect you have, by global standards, an unusually soft and well-cushioned life.

yeah but he's an anarchist.

[TheGreatAmphibianPling]

I have accepted the fact that life is filled with risk.

I doubt it. I suspect you have, by global standards, an unusually soft and well-cushioned life.

yeah but he's an anarchist.

I think he's a libertarian: anarchism is much more intellectually consistent.

[jdcarpe]

Hey now, I'm a libertarian. Tread lightly there.

I mean, really, what's the point? I'm not European. I don't plan on being European. So who gives a crap if they're socialists? They could be fascist anarchists, it still doesn't change the fact that I don't own a car.

[keyboardlover]

This makes no sense at all. It's like saying "Let's legalize murder, because we still have *some* of them even though we have cops." In fact, food safety and child labour laws have all been enormously effective over the past century, as have government standards to increase vehicle safety over the past couple of decades. And arguing that you can't trust "government bodies" is semantically meaningless - trust them to a -perfect job? Or a job that it us reasonably effective? If you can't define your ideas better than this, you really don't have any ideas - just things you say.

If you REALLY think any laws are "effective", no offense, but you know nothing about legal systems. Regagrdless, I fundamentally disagree that guns should be pointed at peaceful people in order to force them to sell or not sell anything. Unlike you I don't believe in legitimizing a monopoly on violence. I am a peaceful person and I have accepted the fact that life is inherently filled with risk.

I doubt it. I suspect you have, by global standards, an unusually soft and well-cushioned life.

Of course I have a soft and well-cushioned life by global standards. Everyone who lives in the USA does. But unlike you I have accepted the fact that life is inherently filled with risk. Because unlike you I don't need to legitimize a monopoly on violence to be comfortable with my life.

I think he's a libertarian: anarchism is much more intellectually consistent.

Only in the Western part of the world does the word "Libertarian" equate to those who believe in statism. I am a voluntaryist. Not only do you not know enough about my views to intelligently make such a comment as this one, you obviously don't know much about libertarianism or anarchism either.

[TheGreatAmphibianPling]

Hey now, I'm a libertarian. Tread lightly there.

You have a Trekkie icon, so I think we all took that for granted.

Although *why* being a Trekkie and a libertarian go together I have no idea - as far as I can determine, the Federation is Sweden In Space. Plus your avatar is Spock, a member of a species that would put Ayn Rand in a mental hospital (rather than having her executed for crimes against literature the way any sane species would.) The only Trek race that comes close to being libertarian are the Ferengi, surely? Shouldn't you have a Quark avatar? Or am I (ironically!) being too logical?

[sth]

Hey now, I'm a libertarian. Tread lightly there.

You have a Trekkie icon, so I think we all took that for granted.

watch it, i kill and eat libertarians for breakfast, during which i watch star trek. treekies ain't all bad.