Should the Wanted forums be viewable by Supporting Members only?

[kodiakblair]

I liked the idea of moving from WTB to Classified before sale went ahead. Then they have to become SM's.

Being in Scotland I've never checked the classified and never heard of the WTB except from the alert I'm responding too,
I'm never going to buy or sell anything here so supporting membership isn't important to me but if I'm buying from eBay
feedback and the like are always checked beforehand.

So make it a rule SM needed to answer WTB

 

[Sav'nBass]

I actually think that a combination of 1 & 3 would be best. This is not for the entire classified section just the WTB section yes? Scammers will find a way just as cheaters will always find a way to cheat, but if the WTB adds could not even be seen except by supporting members that would not hurt anything IMO. Another take away I see in this whole thing that is already posted in the rules actually but ignored by some.. I have done it myself ... is the whole PP fee thing.

 

[Jerry J]

I admit, I'm one of the 4 who got duped. Just let me know if you want to hear the story sometime. My first mistake was not looking at the time the respondent had been a member and their feedback score....totally my fault. I do use the Want Ads quite a bit, so I'd hate to see it limited being viewed only by Supporting Members. I do like Dave's idea up above where someone has to be a member for certain amount of time and have a minimum amount of posts. PayPal has assured me that I'm covered and I'll get a refund. You may want to keep this in mind when someone asks you to send money via a PayPal gift so they don't get charged the PP fees. It may sound like a simple thing, but you totally lose any protection PayPal may offer. Despite my bad experience, my GAS will live on.

I am so sorry to hear about your bum deal. This is really unfortunate and I can really understand why some TB'ers would like to see changes made to discourage future problems.

I agree with what you are saying here. The buyer REALLY has the obligation to vet the seller. I make it a very big point of maintaining strong communications through out the whole process whether I am buying or selling. It's just a good business practice. The seller's and buyer's feedback is critical when I am putting my very hard earned money out or selling something like a Rob Allen or Aguilar db680. Or when I bought one of my Sadowsky's. I don't totally depend on Paypal so I make it a point to really know who I am dealing with. I dealt with a PP issue last year that was a total nightmare for me and a seller on another board. It was all very innocent and fortunately the seller was fairly patient. It could have gotten really ugly.

Although one of the problems with the feedback system is that there is a bit of fear in giving someone a neutral or bad feedback rating due to the possibility of repercussions. I value my feedback rating and my integrity very highly on TB. Much higher than ebay. I've bought and sold on here for well over 13 years and I've always been extremely grateful to TB and Paul for making this option available. So I really hate to see it get modified at all. As i really think that if you could actually could calculate the number of successful transactions compared to the bad ones you would most likely find that the bad ones are a very small percentage. So why make a wide sweeping change based on a very small percentage?

READ that sticky at the top of all the classified title "How not to get ripped off on the internet".

 

[JehuJava]

Another thing that I haven't heard many people mention is looking at the posts of new members looking to buy. If someone wants to buy my gear and they're fairly new, I check out what posts they made to see if they're genuinely into bass. It's easy to do if your already looking at their profile. I've declined a few sells to new guys only posting PM'd on classified ads.

I'm off and on with TB like that other dude said. I can only stand the same "which is the best..." question asked so many times. Seriously, spend time searching. I find most answers to most questions by creative searching. No need to post. But ultimately it's the buying and selling that brings me back in to TB. And then I start looking for interesting posts again. I'd hate to have the buying and selling hampered.

 

[MPGold]

For what it's worth, I've never posted on this site before. I saw the question at hand and wanted to at least offer a perspective. I recently started looking for a new amp and found this site. I haven't posted before but have extensive eBay feedback and am a verifiedPayPal user. Everyone is new until they're not. Buying over the internet needs to be done with some caution and diligence. Surely basic buying common sense should win out over banning anyone who isn't a regular contributor from the market place. Again just my two sense from a newbie...

 

[Jeff Roller]

I vote leave it as is.

I've had wonderful experience with all my completed transactions on TB.

Only one incident with a newbie who turned out to be misrepresenting themselves in an otherwise flawless experience.

You just have to use common sense and verify newcomers. We all were new here at one time, but when dealing with anyone without much history or investment on here, I keep probing until they check out. In the one case it didn't pan out, I returned the money and stopped shipment on the bass after learning the address I was shipping to was notorious for "trans-shipping" items overseas. That would have been okay, but the guy lied and said that was his home address, so I put the brakes on everything and told him I found out he lied to me.

 

[flameworker]

I would not be preparing to be a supporting member if it wasnt for the classifieds section. I would have done it a long time ago but I have an issue getting money from my bank to transfer into my paypal. I say leave it alone. BUT there should be a voting system like ebay has so we can rate sellers, or at least confirm they send the thing. This site cahnged my life, I love it here. Hreat community. I can't wait to be a supporting member and be able to sell my colored borosilicate knobs, trussrod covers, and inlays. hopefully i will be able to tonite at midnite.

 

[peabody]

I am so sorry to hear about your bum deal. This is really unfortunate and I can really understand why some TB'ers would like to see changes made to discourage future problems.

I agree with what you are saying here. The buyer REALLY has the obligation to vet the seller. I make it a very big point of maintaining strong communications through out the whole process whether I am buying or selling. It's just a good business practice. The seller's and buyer's feedback is critical when I am putting my very hard earned money out or selling something like a Rob Allen or Aguilar db680. Or when I bought one of my Sadowsky's. I don't totally depend on Paypal so I make it a point to really know who I am dealing with. I dealt with a PP issue last year that was a total nightmare for me and a seller on another board. It was all very innocent and fortunately the seller was fairly patient. It could have gotten really ugly.

Although one of the problems with the feedback system is that there is a bit of fear in giving someone a neutral or bad feedback rating due to the possibility of repercussions. I value my feedback rating and my integrity very highly on TB. Much higher than ebay. I've bought and sold on here for well over 13 years and I've always been extremely grateful to TB and Paul for making this option available. So I really hate to see it get modified at all. As i really think that if you could actually could calculate the number of successful transactions compared to the bad ones you would most likely find that the bad ones are a very small percentage. So why make a wide sweeping change based on a very small percentage?

READ that sticky at the top of all the classified title "How not to get ripped off on the internet".

I think I should point out that although I was duped, I did not ask for these changes. The poll appeared and I felt obligated to vote and share my story. I admit I have no one to blame but myself for what happened, but if you check my feedback score, I'm not some newbie who just fell off the turnip truck. These guys are good and they know enough about basses to talk the talk. Not to mention, I have never had a scam attempt (and I've had many) that allowed me to pay through PayPal. I believe Paul and the group here are proposing the change to protect the members, not to make it more restrictive. I agree the best way to avoid it is to vet the seller. If you get a "spider sense" that something is off...it probably is.

 

[JehuJava]

I think I should point out that although I was duped, I did not ask for these changes. The poll appeared and I felt obligated to vote and share my story. I admit I have no one to blame but myself for what happened, but if you check my feedback score, I'm not some newbie who just fell off the turnip truck. These guys are good and they know enough about basses to talk the talk. Not to mention, I have never had a scam attempt (and I've had many) that allowed me to pay through PayPal. I believe Paul and the group here are proposing the change to protect the members, not to make it more restrictive. I agree the best way to avoid it is to vet the seller. If you get a "spider sense" that something is off...it probably is.

I don't think anyone is suggesting any ill will toward ya, at least I'm not. Even though I sound preachy preachy, I often find myself feeling "safer" working out deals on TB and neglect to do some of the things I just said. For me this is just a reminder to myself to just be careful.

So...what happens to the money that made it to Nigeria? PayPal can't reclaim I assume? Almost a win win for the scammers until PayPal shuts down overseas transactions.

 

[hintz]

What's with your lack of feedback if you don't me asking?

I know it is a hassle to get feedback from some people (frankly not leaving feedback should be an offense) but I really pushed for my first one. The first feedback completely legitimizes a person in a lot of seller's eyes. I also find it odd 4 people said no, I find it is only 1 in 4 that don't leave feedback.

I never asked for feedback, I also haven't had any issues with the few transactions I made, honestly I didn't even think about it, so I apologize if that offends anyone but I didn't see that as necessary

 

[JeromeH]

I'm new here and not yet a "supporting member" so I'm not really sure in my eyes that I have a right to comment but I will anyway!! I made one purchase from the classifieds here and it was a good one!! Trying to "idiot proof" anything seldom works!! If users do their homework before making a purchase and use paypal (I'll admit I didn't use the purchase goods option) but I had enough contact w/ the seller and based on his "feedback" here was comfortable (for the most part) w/ saving him the sellers fee!! But when in doubt the buyer would be wise to pay using the purchase goods option! So I'd say leave it "as is"!! I admit had a doubt or two when I sent my payment but one always does when purchasing online!! If the buyer's not willing to take the "risk" they should go to a "physical" shop or seller for the purchase. I just don't see why you should "limit" your supporting members to only being able to sell to other supporting members.

 

[hintz]

if need be I can try to get feedback, and I'm confident that it would be positive. Either way I feel for anyone who gets duped out of money, real shame
Andy Hintz

 

[jazzyitalian]

Guys the goal here is to eliminate or significantly decrease the incidence of fraud. Does limiting viewing to contributing members achieve this goal? That's the real question.

Can a person hell bent on defrauding someone obtain a membership for $30 create a bogus name to get a scam. Once caught, the account is deactivated. But what's to stop him from obtaining a new account with a different name, email account etc? I'm not a nay saying here. I just don't know what to think because I don't know what levels of protection are affording to people through a membership requirement. Is the first option going to improve matters?

 

[Oldbasslover]

Regardless of due diligence, there will always be cheats, and honest people will get taken advantage of. Restrictions hurt everyone, but a certain amount of protection is not unreasonable. I think some small restrictions that have a minimal impact are not unreasonable. For the new folks, it is an impetus to become more involved perhaps. And for the person trying to cheat, at least it serves as some impediment, but certainly not too difficult to overcome.

I'm really sorry for those who have been ripped off. It is too bad there are so many dishonest persons in the world. Ultimately that is not a formula for long term success.

 

[Iridescentone]

For what it's worth, I've never posted on this site before. I saw the question at hand and wanted to at least offer a perspective. I recently started looking for a new amp and found this site. I haven't posted before but have extensive eBay feedback and am a verifiedPayPal user. Everyone is new until they're not. Buying over the internet needs to be done with some caution and diligence. Surely basic buying common sense should win out over banning anyone who isn't a regular contributor from the market place. Again just my two sense from a newbie...

What on earth are you talking about? Banning non-contributors? Huh? What?

 

[Iridescentone]

So why make a wide sweeping change based on a very small percentage?

Wait...."wide sweeping change"?

On the contrary, the question at hand is very narrow and focused.

Besides, before the recent format change, wasn't the Wanted sub-forum blocked from non-SM members? Seems that I recall that I was blocked from viewing it at one time, when my SM had expired.

 

[Iridescentone]

How about adding another level of Supporting Membership with a couple of different cost tiers and the higher tier allows viewing and posts in classifieds, etc. ? The lower tier(cost) limits to just basic forum membership with no posting in classifieds but you can still view them.

Or something similar...??

Well, if the hypothetical lower tier SM would not allow selling in the classifieds (but viewing only), but non-supporting members can still enjoy the other aspects of membership ( like an avatar pic), then why would anyone even bother to support at the lower level?

 

[JeromeH]

I really think the "vote" should be based on supporting members input!! And like I said I'm currently not one , but you can see that!! I just got into playing again and if I keep up w/ it this time I most certainly will become one!!!! It's kinda like complaining about politics if you don't vote in governmental elections!!! If you want a say contribute!

 

[red_rhino]

I see it this way; If a supporting membership is required to sell items on Talkbass in the For Sale sub-forum, then a SM should be required in order to "sell" items on Talkbass, via the Wanted ads. To not require a SM allows non-supporting members to still "sell" on Talkbass. This sort of loophole in the rules is disrespectful to supporting members. It's a double standard, simply put.

I'm not sure I agree that it's disrespectful, but it certainly is a loophole. It does in fact allow non-supporting members to "sell" on Talkbass. That should be changed.

The issue of scamming isn't exactly relevant though; that's just been the catalyst for this discussion. You can just as easily be scammed by a supporting member as by a a non-supporting member. Still, it's not a bad idea to put up a obstacle to this sort of "targeted phishing". I've been in plenty of other forums that required supporting memberships for anything sale/buy related, and that never put me off from visiting or participating in other areas.

-Alan

 

[peabody]

I don't think anyone is suggesting any ill will toward ya, at least I'm not. Even though I sound preachy preachy, I often find myself feeling "safer" working out deals on TB and neglect to do some of the things I just said. For me this is just a reminder to myself to just be careful.

So...what happens to the money that made it to Nigeria? PayPal can't reclaim I assume? Almost a win win for the scammers until PayPal shuts down overseas transactions.

I guess I'm just a little sensitive. A couple of the posts in this thread kind of struck a nerve. As far as being "safer", that's pretty much what happened to me. Since the person was a member, it made me let my guard down long enough to get zapped. Actually, the IP address of the of the guy came from Nigeria (according to the folks here at TB), but the money went to China (according to PayPal). What makes it funny is supposedly the bass was coming from Canada. When I filed my claim with PayPal, the person I spoke to assured me that my money would be refunded....but I would have to wait 10 days to allow time for the seller to respond. I guess we'll see what happens...