Do we need rules for fraudulent sales?
02-09-2005, 02:23 PM
#1
Former Moderator
Thread Starter
Do we need rules for fraudulent sales?
A thread in S2000 Talk got a little bent out of shape (https://www.s2ki.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=261302 - depending on how many posts per page you're viewing it is one of the last pages) and raised the question: Do we need a rule that governs what can be done to a fraudulent seller?
I don't know if anything can be done (or what good it will do), but I felt like enough members were upset with how things transpired between two S2Ki members that it might deserve some attention.
I do hope that this thread in Site Info can stay on topic and not sink to the level that the above mentioned thread sunk to.
I don't know if anything can be done (or what good it will do), but I felt like enough members were upset with how things transpired between two S2Ki members that it might deserve some attention.
I do hope that this thread in Site Info can stay on topic and not sink to the level that the above mentioned thread sunk to.
02-09-2005, 02:38 PM
#2
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: NY
Posts: 4,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think s2ki needs to do anything additional.
This site is the equivalent of a supermarket bulletin board - you can't hold the supermarket responsible.
I do think that posting an item for sale should be limited to members. People should be willing to pay for the privledge of posting an item for sale. That obviously would not have impacted this last sour transaction because Trent is a gold member.
Just my .02
This site is the equivalent of a supermarket bulletin board - you can't hold the supermarket responsible.
I do think that posting an item for sale should be limited to members. People should be willing to pay for the privledge of posting an item for sale. That obviously would not have impacted this last sour transaction because Trent is a gold member.
Just my .02
02-09-2005, 03:08 PM
#3
Former Moderator
Here's something I posted on the other thread that might help us evaluate this more clearly:
"First order of business...supporting Trip's efforts to get some manner of refund for his trouble.
Second order of business...determining what the problem is that led to this situation.
Third order of business...determining possible courses of action (ie new For Sale guidelines or ammendments to site rules) to avoid situations like this in the future.
Fourth order of business...determining what, if any, action should be taken by s2ki towards Trent for his handling of this issue or whether having his name unofficially blacklisted is sufficient."
It would seem to me that s2ki is in an interesting position, because "we" don't really have the ability to do anything, yet it's in our best interests to ensure that the sales environment is fair, honest and equitable for our users.
I think it could make sense to restrict selling to members of the board. I think it could also make sense to mention that members confirmed on the bad sellers list will be subject to banning upon review of the administrators.
Beyond that, I would suggest that maybe we need to put more wording in the guidelines not only to ensure that BUYER BEWARE, but maybe call out specific examples of problem sales that have occurred to heighten people's awareness and trigger them to do some more due diligence before entering into online transactions.
One particular example that jumps to mind based on the current issue that's being dealt with is international sales...specifically with regards to exchange rates. I'm not sure whether it should be up to s2ki to form a policy or whether we should simply call it out as something that needs to be negotiated.
Further, we should probably call out as obviously the recommendation to use some sort of escrow service to broker deals to minimize the risks.
These are just some initial thoughts...
"First order of business...supporting Trip's efforts to get some manner of refund for his trouble.
Second order of business...determining what the problem is that led to this situation.
Third order of business...determining possible courses of action (ie new For Sale guidelines or ammendments to site rules) to avoid situations like this in the future.
Fourth order of business...determining what, if any, action should be taken by s2ki towards Trent for his handling of this issue or whether having his name unofficially blacklisted is sufficient."
It would seem to me that s2ki is in an interesting position, because "we" don't really have the ability to do anything, yet it's in our best interests to ensure that the sales environment is fair, honest and equitable for our users.
I think it could make sense to restrict selling to members of the board. I think it could also make sense to mention that members confirmed on the bad sellers list will be subject to banning upon review of the administrators.
Beyond that, I would suggest that maybe we need to put more wording in the guidelines not only to ensure that BUYER BEWARE, but maybe call out specific examples of problem sales that have occurred to heighten people's awareness and trigger them to do some more due diligence before entering into online transactions.
One particular example that jumps to mind based on the current issue that's being dealt with is international sales...specifically with regards to exchange rates. I'm not sure whether it should be up to s2ki to form a policy or whether we should simply call it out as something that needs to be negotiated.
Further, we should probably call out as obviously the recommendation to use some sort of escrow service to broker deals to minimize the risks.
These are just some initial thoughts...
02-09-2005, 03:58 PM
#4
Registered User
Do you guys really want to put yourselves in the position of deciding who is in the right and who is in the wrong when there's a disagreement? What about vendors when someone has a bad experience with them?
I think banning for this kind of thing is a can of worms you don't want to get into.
I think banning for this kind of thing is a can of worms you don't want to get into.
02-09-2005, 04:06 PM
#5
Former Moderator
I'm honestly not sure whether the admins of s2ki want to get involved in this or not, so I'm just sort of brainstorming on the issue so we can make a conscious decision on whether to do something or leave things be.
What I DO know is that, whether s2ki is directly involved in the sales that transpire on the board or not, the site DOES have a vested interest in taking reasonable measures to ensure that everyone is on the same page.
What I DO know is that, whether s2ki is directly involved in the sales that transpire on the board or not, the site DOES have a vested interest in taking reasonable measures to ensure that everyone is on the same page.
02-09-2005, 04:23 PM
#6
Administrator
[quote name='Warren J. Dew' date='Feb 9 2005, 04:58 PM'] Do you guys really want to put yourselves in the position of deciding who is in the right and who is in the wrong when there's a disagreement?
02-10-2005, 05:08 AM
#7
Registered User
I believe the case with Trip and the case with Dave aka W1ingman losing money shows that the board is changing. And although the fraudulent (or questionable) transactions are limited they seem to be more and more prevalent here and elsewhere.
And while the buyer should do his due diligence ie references, contact names and numbers, home address etc etc, The admin should also hold some responsibility to do what ever it takes to protect it
And while the buyer should do his due diligence ie references, contact names and numbers, home address etc etc, The admin should also hold some responsibility to do what ever it takes to protect it
Trending Topics
02-10-2005, 05:26 AM
#8
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 2,272
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by cthree' date='Feb 9 2005, 07:23 PM
Most of the "fraud" is really misunderstanding. There are real cases of ripped off but most of the time it is a misunderstand between the seller and buyer that leads to dissatisfaction. You buy something and it arrives scratched or in some condition you weren't expecting. If you buy something used then expect it to be used and allow for normal wear and tear.
There is seriously little we can do about bad dealings you have with other members or vendors. Even if we wanted to there isn't much we can do. Both side always have a story to tell and both will certainly lie or leave out facts to win the point. I have no way of knowing who is in the right. You've got to take responsibility for your transactions and exercise your own discretion.
There is seriously little we can do about bad dealings you have with other members or vendors. Even if we wanted to there isn't much we can do. Both side always have a story to tell and both will certainly lie or leave out facts to win the point. I have no way of knowing who is in the right. You've got to take responsibility for your transactions and exercise your own discretion.
This site should not be held responsible for the sales. That's just asking too much I think..
02-10-2005, 05:41 AM
#9
Originally Posted by Warren J. Dew' date='Feb 9 2005, 07:58 PM
Do you guys really want to put yourselves in the position of deciding who is in the right and who is in the wrong when there's a disagreement? What about vendors when someone has a bad experience with them?
I think banning for this kind of thing is a can of worms you don't want to get into.
I think banning for this kind of thing is a can of worms you don't want to get into.
