I'm done with the For Sale section of the site

[Bodgers]

So I listed a TS extension for a fixed price, supplying a photo like an obedient poster.

After I got a message asking me about postage, I posted a reply (in case anyone thought it was sold after that question) saying it is still for sale and you can make me an offer.

And then some poster (that needs better things to do with their time) reported my post for non compliance with the selling rules. Thread removed. Thanks!

Which begs the question - isn't that what normally happens in any of the sale posts on the forum i.e. people follow up with an offer? It's like the normal eb and flow of. Sale.

When you lay on top of that the daft rules about not even posting a link to an auction you have a bit of a joke to be honest.

Things need to change. Won't be using it again until they do.



Sent from my MI 3W using Tapatalk

 

[Noel]

So I listed a TS extension for a fixed price, supplying a photo like an obedient poster.

After I got a message asking me about postage, I posted a reply (in case anyone thought it was sold after that question) saying it is still for sale and you can make me an offer.

And then some poster (that needs better things to do with their time) reported my post for non compliance with the selling rules. Thread removed. Thanks!

Which begs the question - isn't that what normally happens in any of the sale posts on the forum i.e. people follow up with an offer? It's like the normal eb and flow of. Sale.

When you lay on top of that the daft rules about not even posting a link to an auction you have a bit of a joke to be honest.

Things need to change. Won't be using it again until they do.



Sent from my MI 3W using Tapatalk

Rules are there for all members to benefit from, dead easy to understand and the board works well under the rules.
There'll be no changes and up to you what you do or don't do.

Thanks.

 

[MattRoberts]

And exactly what rule was broken? I see no infraction by clarifying that an item is still for sale...

 

[Droogs]

fixed price converted to open to offers - rules say no

 

[Noel]

I have the receipts.......... (If you excuse the Americanism )

Still for sale, make me an offer before it goes on the auction site, the name of which cannot be uttered on this hallowed forum...

 

[ColeyS1]

Mentioning if it doesn't sell you'll put it on the auction site - rules say no.

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

 

[Walney Col]

*snip* dead easy to understand and the board works well under the rules.
There'll be no changes and up to you what you do or don't do.

Thanks.

Of course that's the crux of the matter right there isn't it, it's only "easy to understand and working well" from the moderators point of view. Most others I suspect would argue differently.

Col.

 

[Noel]

*snip* dead easy to understand and the board works well under the rules.
There'll be no changes and up to you what you do or don't do.

Thanks.

Of course that's the crux of the matter right there isn't it, it's only "easy to understand and working well" from the moderators point of view. Most others I suspect would argue differently.

Col.

Very Trumpian Col. So, forgetting "most others", what's your issue with the board?
It's simple enough, these are the main guidelines, especially in relation to this particular thread-
#Fixed price so no auction type sales
#Sale cannot be advertised elsewhere
#No free advertising for other sites, implied or otherwise

That's about it, sure various other little bits and pieces to cover all the oddities that sometimes pop up but it's mostly showing respect for a free service amongst like minded people. Certainly there has be a good balance between members using the board and those that help to run it and I think we've achieved that. Always willing to hear suggestions and opinion.

 

[Droogs]

Hi Noel
Though I agree with the rules, I feel on this occasion they may have been applied a little too literally rather than in the spirit. I think Naz was giving people here a prefered option of first refusal so to speak and merely meant that the item was still for sale and used the "make me an offer" as a colloqial turn of phrase and not as a statement of intent to auction it here.

Not trying to stir things up just passing on my take on events, especially as Naz has been a positive forum member as far as I am aware.

rgds

 

[CHJ]

Hi Noel
Though I agree with the rules, I feel on this occasion they may have been applied a little too literally rather than in the spirit. I think Naz was giving people here a prefered option of first refusal so to speak and merely meant that the item was still for sale and used the "make me an offer" as a colloqial turn of phrase and not as a statement of intent to auction it here.

Not trying to stir things up just passing on my take on events, especially as Naz has been a positive forum member as far as I am aware.

rgds

Droogs I think you had better check your facts and read the two threads that you are mixing up.

 

[rafezetter]

Hmm - while I agree there are rules to be followed - would it have been such a hardship to just send Bodgers a PM and alter his post until he can ammend it rather than just delete it outright?

Seems incredibly heavy handed, more on the order of forums run by gaming companies that will harbour no negative comments (or rutlands it seems) and just delete everythign that's even vaguely disparaging.

There's no need to be quite that draconian about running the forum - ESPECIALLY IN LIGHT OF THE FACT THAT OTHER "FOR SALE" POSTS HAVE BEEN ALLOWED TO STAND WITHOUT PHOTOS OR SET PRICE FOR DAYS ON OCCASION BEFORE THEY GET AMMENDED. (emphasis not shouting)

If we all agree that the "mistake" was unintentional, can it be re-posted and ammeded accordingly?

May I gently suggest Noel and other moderators give a little slack for people posting in the "for sale" section? Bearing in mind that they are doing it HERE, and usually at a price LESS THAN THEY WOULD GET ELSEWHERE; and yet instead of HELPING a forum member pass on a tool or other item at a discount, you hammer him for a mild infraction of a rule that could have been altered in seconds.

Yes there are rules, and they are clearly laid out, but lets be honest, we are mostly all men here, just how often do you "read the instructions" ?

This is meant to be a forum of friendly discussion (most of the time) not 1984.

PS - whomever reported his post - get a life. Seriously. It was clearly not a mod otherwise it would have been dealt with, so it's one of you lot. Try devoting some of that "whaaa he's not adhering to the rules!!!" energy into making your local area of society a better place instead of on this forum, you might think you're doing it to "help the mods" but it just makes you a small minded, inflexible person.

PPS - some examples of "the rules" being broken, but the posts are still "live" and untouched.

legacy-ornamental-mill-lathe-t110288.html

wooden-truck-wheels-and-axles-to-suit-t110273.html

rutlands-t-track-t110082.html

free-209m-x-hodgson-flexistrip-butyl-glazing-strip-tape-t109920.html

festool-mft3-little-used-t109966.html

wadkin-bursgreen-10-ags-saw-chip-deflector-t109717.html

That's just the first 3 pages of 9 (not including the hundreds of deleted pages in that section), shall I go on? Or will you take the point that perhaps excessive moderation has been used with Bodgers post yet applied NONE to others; each of those posts do NOT HAVE a "for sale posts are required to have a picture" message from a moderator ANYWHERE TO BE SEEN.

From the "rules" sticky:

"10 –Images.
Supporting images should be provided with the opening post. Do not make a post and wait to see if there is interest before offering to post images. Either post all together or not at all.

Either enforce a rule or don't but "when it suits" is NOT AN OPTION.

Rules are there for all members to benefit from {snip} There'll be no changes and up to you what you do or don't do.Thanks.

You might want to rethink that statement in light of the above evidence

My personal belief is that the moderator team has been observed showing bias, and that's never a good thing on a forum.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

It does say "should be" not "must be". There's little point in bothering to post a picture of e.g. a brand new item that everone knows. (As the T track ad, e.g.).

 

[Noel]

Hmm - while I agree there are rules to be followed - would it have been such a hardship to just send Bodgers a PM and alter his post until he can ammend it rather than just delete it outright?

No, rules are clear and mods have better things to do than enter into what can often be extensive PM discussions about such things.

Seems incredibly heavy handed, more on the order of forums run by gaming companies that will harbour no negative comments (or rutlands it seems) and just delete everythign that's even vaguely disparaging.

I don't hang about gaming forums but you are wildly inaccurate about deleting negative comments about the forum, we've always discussed issues in an open and transparent manner, as evidenced by this thread.

There's no need to be quite that draconian about running the forum - ESPECIALLY IN LIGHT OF THE FACT THAT OTHER "FOR SALE" POSTS HAVE BEEN ALLOWED TO STAND WITHOUT PHOTOS OR SET PRICE FOR DAYS ON OCCASION BEFORE THEY GET AMMENDED. (emphasis not shouting)

If these are an issue just report them if they bother you, we try and cover all areas of the site but certainly some things slip by.

If we all agree that the "mistake" was unintentional, can it be re-posted and ammeded accordingly?

What mistake? Nothing mistaken about referring to eBay and disparaging forum rules.

May I gently suggest Noel and other moderators give a little slack for people posting in the "for sale" section? Bearing in mind that they are doing it HERE, and usually at a price LESS THAN THEY WOULD GET ELSEWHERE; and yet instead of HELPING a forum member pass on a tool or other item at a discount, you hammer him for a mild infraction of a rule that could have been altered in seconds.

Nope.

Yes there are rules, and they are clearly laid out, but lets be honest, we are mostly all men here, just how often do you "read the instructions" ?

No excuse, especially in this case where the OP knew exactly what he was doing. See my "receipts" post.

This is meant to be a forum of friendly discussion (most of the time) not 1984.

I suspect you are more friendlier than you appear to be in this post.

PS - whomever reported his post - get a life. Seriously. It was clearly not a mod otherwise it would have been dealt with, so it's one of you lot. Try devoting some of that "whaaa he's not adhering to the rules!!!" energy into making your local area of society a better place instead of on this forum, you might think you're doing to "help the mods" but it just makes you a small minded, inflexible person.

Do not insult other members no matter how inaccurate your view is.

All the best.

 

[rafezetter]

Ordinarily Phil I'd agree it's a subtle semantic difference and can be seen either way, but then I've also seen moderators reminding pictures are required, so again, there's disparity which needs to be addressed and the whole thing re-examined for clarity.

We all understand and accept that people who post in "for sale" are quite probably taking a financial loss to do so, so excessive moderation really isn't in that spirit and might even scare some lurkers away.

In this instance the item being sold was HALF the cost from axminster, HALF. The fact there were no takers was irrelevant, if you can't cut a member some slack under those conditions and just ask him to ammend his post, what hope is there?

 

[CHJ]

.......
My personal belief is that the moderator team has been observed showing bias, and that's never a good thing on a forum.

You are entitled to your belief, but you have:-
No knowlege of what moderator actions are recorded in the Logs.
No knowledge of what moderator threads exist to discuss on-going thread reports etc.
No knowledge of the number of Posts that are amended to give members the benifit of the doubt.
No knowlege of the number of Pm's with Posters regarding infractions.
No knowledge of which members choose to go public with their grivences before a moderator has time to edit a post and reinstate a thread. etc.

You think I personaly am biased, of course I am, I have an opinion and have to make a dozen or more judgment calls every day as I suspect the other mods do, I'm afraid the forum has to put up with our falability or else have no moderation at all.

 

[rafezetter]

*sigh* - see what happens?

you question a mod and they jump on you.

I've BEEN a moderator, for YEARS on several gaming forums - you should try that if you think this one is hard work where all the members are adults. I know the score. I also know that personal bais alters how a moderator can read or interpret a post, deliberate or subconscious.

I did not accuse moderators here of deleting negative posts I did however say that the heavyhandedness smacked of that same mentality - which is different - I can prove it - I kept a copy of the "offending post", I always do when I think there's a risk of moderation.

CHJ, you said I don't have any knowldge of PM's to posters regarding infractions, here, no. But taking that as a given, why does Noel the other moderator say: "No, rules are clear and mods have better things to do than enter into what can often be extensive PM discussions about such things."

The flavor of that text is "I didn't want to send him a PM in case it became a drawn out discussion, and I don't have time for that". My answer to that would be don't be a moderator if you can't spare the time to do it properly. (and lets ignore the bit about you spending the time to write answers to all of my comments in my long post defending or otherwise altering it to suit.)

When I moderate I PM, show them their mistake, where to check that it's a mistake on their part, and tell them to ammend it or it'll be deleted, their choice. I'm covered, he's been told - there's ZERO ROOM for discussion, it's done.

It's two lines and gets the point across. I'm failing to see why this became such an issue. If Bodgers had been sent such a message, he would have no cause to post as he did and start this furore.

Noel your "receipts" post proves nothing because that websites name appears in the forum all the time.

search...... 28021 times to be precise.

in the "for sale" section 9 times - Bodgers being one - 2 moderator threads and 6 other separate forum members mentioning it in thier posts in that section - Including one that follows almost the exact same format as Bodgers' yet there it is - large as life, not moderated or deleted.

Bodgers did not set a precedent but paid the price, and THAT is what gets me so steamed; the disparity.

One last thing just so we are clear - this isn't personal - I've dealt with fellow moderators on the sites I'm involved with the same way, I've seen some truly lopsided bias from quite a few over the years, and I've taken them to task as much as I've said it here.

I'm not here to be popular - I'm quite un-popular if evidence is to be beleived - but right or wrong I'll take a stand and I'll speak my mind nonetheless if I think there's something that needs to be said.

Moderators can forever alter the flavor of a forum with actions sowing bad seeds, and I deeply wish that to not happen here.

It's clearly annoyed Bodgers and it could have been avoided.

 

[MrTeroo]

The NazNomad situation could also have been easily avoided. A longstanding member has now left the forum it seems because of rude 'my way or the highway' moderating

come on mods, stop circling the wagons and listen a bit more please?

 

[RogerS]

Oh, c'mon, guys. We've all got better things to do.

Let's leave things at that and move on.

 

[Noel]

*sigh* - see what happens?

you question a mod and they jump on you.

I've BEEN a moderator, for YEARS on several gaming forums - you should try that if you think this one is hard work where all the members are adults. I know the score. I also know that personal bais alters how a moderator can read or interpret a post, deliberate or subconscious.

I did not accuse moderators here of deleting negative posts I did however say that the heavyhandedness smacked of that same mentality - which is different - I can prove it - I kept a copy of the "offending post", I always do when I think there's a risk of moderation.

CHJ, you said I don't have any knowldge of PM's to posters regarding infractions, here, no. But taking that as a given, why does Noel the other moderator say: "No, rules are clear and mods have better things to do than enter into what can often be extensive PM discussions about such things."

The flavor of that text is "I didn't want to send him a PM in case it became a drawn out discussion, and I don't have time for that". My answer to that would be don't be a moderator if you can't spare the time to do it properly. (and lets ignore the bit about you spending the time to write answers to all of my comments in my long post defending or otherwise altering it to suit.)

When I moderate I PM, show them their mistake, where to check that it's a mistake on their part, and tell them to ammend it or it'll be deleted, their choice. I'm covered, he's been told - there's ZERO ROOM for discussion, it's done.

It's two lines and gets the point across. I'm failing to see why this became such an issue. If Bodgers had been sent such a message, he would have no cause to post as he did and start this furore.

Noel your "receipts" post proves nothing because that websites name appears in the forum all the time.

search...... 28021 times to be precise.

in the "for sale" section 9 times - Bodgers being one - 2 moderator threads and 6 other separate forum members mentioning it in thier posts in that section - Including one that follows almost the exact same format as Bodgers' yet there it is - large as life, not moderated or deleted.

Bodgers did not set a precedent but paid the price, and THAT is what gets me so steamed; the disparity.

One last thing just so we are clear - this isn't personal - I've dealt with fellow moderators on the sites I'm involved with the same way, I've seen some truly lopsided bias from quite a few over the years, and I've taken them to task as much as I've said it here.

I'm not here to be popular - I'm quite un-popular if evidence is to be beleived - but right or wrong I'll take a stand and I'll speak my mind nonetheless if I think there's something that needs to be said.

Moderators can forever alter the flavor of a forum with actions sowing bad seeds, and I deeply wish that to not happen here.

It's clearly annoyed Bodgers and it could have been avoided.

You've missed the point entirely and seem to not understand any of the points I've made. But no worries.

 

[Noel]

The NazNomad situation could also have been easily avoided. A longstanding member has now left the forum it seems because of rude 'my way or the highway' moderating

come on mods, stop circling the wagons and listen a bit more please?

Any member indulging in racism, bigotry or sectarianism of any nature will be sanctioned.