posted on March 28, 2001 07:15:39 AM new
edited the above link, because the Moderators Corner no longer exists.
And moderators, before you go getting trigger happy, IMHO this recent change has *everything* to do with eBay, as it will affect each & every buyer & seller on the eBay site.
posted on March 28, 2001 07:40:34 AM new
It's about time. But you know, these boards will turn into, "Look at this listings TOS," "check out this crappy photo." Oh well, have to take the bad with the good.
posted on March 28, 2001 07:58:19 AM new
quickdraw,
I'm sure we'll all have a period of adjustment with this new rule. But as time passes and various threads are evaluated, I'm sure we'll come to a point where we'll all know exactly what will be allowed and where the line is.
This is new for us, too. So please bear with us. We will be as fair as we possibly can and of course, we'll use good old common sense in determining whether the "crappy photo" comment would be considered discussing the seller.
In short, this process will evolve with time and experience. We'll all learn together.
posted on March 28, 2001 07:59:33 AM new
I have to agree with several of the posters on that thread...links to auctions are a bad idea. When we're talking about people's livelihoods, these public dissections are dangerous to the accused but innocent...and serve no useful purpose, IMO. The party involved (buyer or seller) can be totally trashed...and have done no wrong, but only accused of wrongdoing.
I remember all too well what can happen when sellers arrive. Cripes, it resembles a Roman arena around here. Few rational sellers are foolish enough to subject themselves to such carnage...so we're often left with the...uh...not so rational. It seems inevitable that their identities will become known, if links are posted.
We can discuss generalities in peace...who needs to know specifics? Plus, detailed help is available in email from many of the generous and knowledgeable posters here.
edited to make some sense...
[ edited by toke on Mar 28, 2001 08:04 AM ]
posted on March 28, 2001 08:21:52 AM new
Well I am no legal expert here....but this new ruling CONCERNS ME GREATLY. All we need is for some troll to pick an auction out from a list.....make an accusation....trash the seller....and open up the possibility of a lawsuit for slander if it got out of hand. Maybe I am being dramatic here....but to me it certainly sounds plausible.
posted on March 28, 2001 08:37:00 AM new
We will allow links to auctions if you wish to discuss the auction item. We must draw the line,however, when the seller becomes the topic of conversation. The reason for this is just basic etiquette - it is rude to talk about someone "behind their back". Our Community Guidelines consider auction IDs to be private information.
You may discuss a situation in general terms. If you bought a widget, and the seller received payment and never shipped the item, there is no reason to name the seller specifically.
Discussion of the situation can take place without necessarily bringing the seller ID into it.
So, the email notifications won't be necessary since sellers/bidders will not be discussed by name.
I hope this helps. It's pretty cut and dried, so I'm sure we'll have no problems adhering to the rules.
.............................................
All this NEW rule comes down to is AW creating their own little workaround to the new eBay online contact forms.
IMO it's stupid, it's unnecessary, and it's going to open a HUGE freakin can of worms.
You can't unring the bell, and there's going to be plenty of bells being rung here over the next few months.
But as time passes and various threads are evaluated, I'm sure we'll come to a point where we'll all know exactly what will be allowed and where the line is.
Swell, and in the meantime there will be numerous innocent parties [both buyers & sellers] slandered by the perps on AW. What a great community that will create ..... NOT.
The moment an auction link is posted both the seller & the buyer will be open to every whack job/vigilante that decides he/she will personally right the wrong.
I honestly couldn't give a rat's azz what anyone on these boards has to say about my auctions, but the moment my BUSINESS is affected by some pin head with an agenda, they'll be hell to pay.
I strongly suggest AW Admin does an about face on this rule, before it's too late.
posted on March 28, 2001 09:03:15 AM new
Reddeer: Indeed, and I don't want to be in the room when the bill comes due.
"We must draw the line,however, when the seller becomes the topic of conversation."
And when will this line be drawn...after the seller is identified and the trashing has begun?
"The reason for this is just basic etiquette - it is rude to talk about someone "behind their back".
Manners, or lack of them, is a very subjective matter. What I may find rude may be perfectly acceptable to another. Who gets to wear the Emily Post hat?
Has AW carefully considered the possible liability exposure and the possible consequences?
This new guideline is clearly not one of the most well thought out changes to be announced by AW.
posted on March 28, 2001 09:04:42 AM new
Everyone,
If the seller/bidder is any part of the discussion, the thread will be locked or deleted.
We will not allow trashing of a seller/bidder. Period. The minute we see that happening, action will be taken.
The purpose for allowing the links is for those auctions that may be of general interest (like the Jimi Hendrix guitar auction), not to ever allow discussion of the seller/bidder.
Hope that clarifies.
Edited to add: The thread in the Moderator's Corner has been sent to Administration for their review.
Pat
[email protected]
[ edited by pattaylor on Mar 28, 2001 09:08 AM ]
posted on March 28, 2001 09:13:28 AM new
Have to agree with Reddeer on this one, The potential harm far outweighs any usefulness that might come from it.
If the seller/bidder is any part of the discussion, the thread will be locked or deleted.
Again, you cannot unring a bell, Pat.
If I was to post your business name on an online board, which then gave perps the ability to get your home phone number & address info with a few more clicks of a mouse, how would you feel?
Lock the thread, so what?
Once the dirty deed has been done, there's nothing AW can do to undo it. Capeesh?
We will not allow trashing of a seller/bidder. Period. The minute we see that happening, action will be taken.
Great, except what happens if 100 posters/lurkers have already seen the auction link before you take action? AW is constantly harping about it's HUGE member base, and by the time some of these threads/posts are deleted there's a potential that thousands of AW users will have already gleaned the info they needed before the deletion.
I know this isn't your doing Pat, but I hope Mark et al can see fit to give this some more thought.
Again, I understand your concern. However, that sort of post happens now, albeit very rarely. We delete them as soon as we are aware of them. That part of the rule has not changed.
And thanks for your understanding of the mod's positions.
posted on March 28, 2001 09:28:43 AM new
Almost every night I work very late at my desk as I catch up on bookkeeping and orders, etc. for my B&M store. I often have AW on my computer so I spin in my chair from my writing desk back to my computer & refresh the screen.
We also have AW on our screen at work at times during the day and click in now and again between customers.
Many times I have seen info posted with links that identify all sorts of things and at times they are there for quite awhile before they get deleted.
Now, I am not a vindictive person and I see no need to meddle in anyone's auction but like Reddeer said, there are lots of other lurkers out there with maybe different intentions.
I think the difference is that with this new rule AW will be allowing links to be posted without the need of inviting the parties mentioned in the thread.
Obviously once a link is posted, both the buyer & seller are open to the AW masses.
It's easy to say that this & that won't be allowed, but IMHO it would be much easier for AW to state:
No Auction Links ALLOWED - PERIOD
Yes, some weenie can still post a link, but at the same time at least AW won't be endorsing it, at all. Once you open this pandora's box, the threads with auction links will run rampant.
I have never understood the need for an AW user to post a link to an auction?
99% of the problems/questions that come up on AW can be addressed without an actual auction number or link being posted.
Sorry, but this has always been a thorn in my side, and AW just drove that thorn in a bit deeper with their latest new rule.
I've been around here long enough to see the ugly side of some posters, and I pity the poor slob that has that ugly turned on them & their business, for nothing more than to allow someone "to discuss the auction item".
posted on March 28, 2001 09:45:27 AM new
I'm with everyone else on this topic.
I don't want links to my auctions on this board unless I put them there myself. Because of this new policy change, if I saw one and for some reason it was used to hurt my business, I would hold AUCTIONWATCH personally RESPONSIBLE.
Are you ready for all of the problems this will cause? You better hire a few more lawyers.
[ edited by outoftheblue on Mar 28, 2001 09:47 AM ]
posted on March 28, 2001 09:55:16 AM new
I have seen sellers and bidders reputations totally trashed on these boards and nothing was done about it for hours or even days. Locking threads does not help the situation.
Once this happens the damage is already done and it's a little too late to do anything about it.
posted on March 28, 2001 10:19:51 AM new
Something seems out of whack here. We have two threads going, each full of well-argued protests by many of AW's longtime posters regarding this new policy change -- protests made by people who run auctions for a living, not auction-related websites ... Both threads are almost entirely against the new policy, with nary a single person saying they think it's a wise move (although I'm sure now that I've said this, someone will feel compelled to post Well I don't know about anyone else, but I applaud the new policy ..) ... And yet AW is digging in its heels and telling us we're wrong and that it knows what's best in this matter.
That doesn't make sense to me. What's the unspoken agenda here? There has to be one. AW couldn't have believed that people would go for this. What is so important about this new policy that AW is standing by it despite strident protest from its core membership?
posted on March 28, 2001 10:29:15 AM new
Well I wouldn't know about anyone who applauds the new policy, but I feel compelled to say that I think it stinks.
posted on March 28, 2001 10:30:54 AM new
Pattaylor said:
"I'm sure we'll all have a period of adjustment with this new rule. But as time passes and various threads are evaluated, I'm sure we'll come to a point where we'll all know exactly what will be allowed and where the line is."
Since that has yet to happen with other rules, it does not stand to reason that it will happen with this one. Nothing I've yet read from AW staff on this issue has justified creating--CREATING--a new and genuine risk of permanent harm to the business of both individual sellers on eBay, and to eBay itself.
"We will not allow trashing of a seller/bidder. Period. The minute we see that happening, action will be taken."
Disclosure of personal information here is verboten, right? Yet you (pattaylor) had a lengthy conversation in the MC with amy about a problem she had on the "Bookselling for Idiots" thread. She asked "Is it allowable per the AW TOS for one member to reveal the ebay ID of another member without the permission of that member?" During the course of that conversation with you, she said, "Can I also make the assumption that since she has decided to reveal my ID that I may now publically reveal hers? (and yes, I DO know it)." Later in the thread, she says, "If this is allowed I guess it is alright for me to mention that I met Val Erie who is 47 years old?" It's a more explicit repeat of the information she posted in the Bookselling for Idiots thread, in response to being eBay-ID-outed: "Executivegirl....I bow to your superior detective abilities! I was only able to find items on sale when I played Miss Marple. But I did get to meet Val Erie, so it was worth it. Meeting such an illustrious person made me rejoice 47 times"
That appears to be a person's name--first and last, or a corrupted first name--and a person's age. Quite likely, a specific person's name and age, deducible from context. It also appears to be fine with you that Amy posted it.
It is very, very hard to believe that moderator vigilance can protect the businesses of thousands of eBayers from the harm that this policy change seems almost assured to bring some of them.
posted on March 28, 2001 10:32:53 AM new
As is very evident by the muddled "policy" and "terms" of the new fee schedule, it is my opinion that AW lacks the ability to write good policy. How many of you honestly grasp the and fully understand the fee schedules solely on the basis of how these fees are explained by AW? How many posts and threads have there been from members begging and pleading for a consise explanation of the fees?
There is much evidence to support that ideas are put into play well before any long term thought is given to the effect that new idea will have.
Closing the barn door after the horse escapes is pointless. As pointless as locking a thread that is full of personal information that has already been seen by a few hundred members. It only takes one nutcase to stir up trouble for a seller or a buyer.
I'm not sure how to 100% prevent these types of posts. But, a clear policy stating that it is Not Allowed is a beginning. We delete them as soon as we are aware of them is many times well after the damage is already done.
Edited to add, at the very least, every member of AW who posts here should be using a different name than the one they sell or buy with on eBay. I know some of you don't believe in "hiding", but sometimes you have to protect yourself.
[ edited by Meya on Mar 28, 2001 10:40 AM ]
posted on March 28, 2001 10:39:31 AM new
I agree with reddeer. There is no good reason to have auction links. Period.
If I cannot discuss a situation with an auction (whether from my perspective as a buyer or seller) without posting identifying information, specificially links, then I shouldn't be posting it. Period.
Many posters here seem to regard AW as a forum for their personal grievances against a seller/bidder. Many of these posts are nothing more than unsubstantiated allegations and character bashing. AW mostly turns a blind eye -- they prefer to focus their energies on deleting links that are critical of their policies.
Yes, some posters here have AW IDs that are the same as their eBay IDs so one could take the time to search their bidder or seller history if one was so inclined -- obviously AW can't control that -- but allowing links to be used indiscriminately reflects very POORLY on AW's management.
posted on March 28, 2001 10:44:11 AM new
I'm official opposed to this change. The limitations the old policy caused were minor and I don't see a positive outcome on this change.
To change your posting ID, all you need to do is register a new account under another name. Then shoot an email to [email protected] so we can suspend the posting privileges for the reddeer account. This will not affect any other privileges of the reddeer account.
posted on March 28, 2001 10:46:28 AM newMany posters here seem to regard AW as a forum for their personal grievances against a seller/bidder. Many of these posts are nothing more than unsubstantiated allegations and character bashing.
Also, it's interesting how often, in the event the bashee is somehow identified and made aware of the discussion, the basher either edits their previous posts or refuses to participate further in the "roast". There is seldom only one side to any story.
posted on March 28, 2001 10:56:12 AM new
I missed that thread by amy in the Moderator's Corner. But given the same scenario, in the hands of different posters, and with the new policy in effect, is it implausible to think that one day soon we'll see members posting links to auctions of their chatboard opponents, in attempts to "out" them or cause other discomfort?
posted on March 28, 2001 10:57:19 AM new
Has anyone considered the possible use of a little reverse psychology here? We're usually screaming about censorship...remember?
Maybe AW has wised up...and allowed our input to create the policy they have actually wanted all along. Then we'll be happy campers, and they'll prove that they listen to us. I can't believe they suddenly want auction links. When you think about it, can you?
It seems inevitable that their identities will become known, if links are posted.