skoker said:
What can you do?
Let the buyer beware, that's all I can say...
...or MR takes a commission off from each transaction to pay for a disputed transactions ombudsman.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Code Blue! in the Marketplace
- Thread starter skoker
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
What can you do?
Let the buyer beware, that's all I can say...
...or MR takes a commission off from each transaction to pay for a disputed transactions ombudsman.
For a small fee - no more than 50% - I'll happily act as the middleman. Send the items to me, send the payment to me, and I'll forward each accordingly after taking my share.Blue Velvet said:What can you do?
Let the buyer beware, that's all I can say...
...or MR takes a commission off from each transaction to pay for a disputed transactions ombudsman.
I think the Marketplace is a fantastic area but I wouldn't go as far as insisting on avatar equipped members. I think a sensible number of posts (say 100 minimum) along with a time limit before you can use the Marketplace (say 6-12 months) is a better idea.
Anyone can blast through 100 posts, but to remain comitted to the forum for 6-12 months means you will weed out those who see the Marketplace as a quick place to scam someone.
I've only got about 190 posts on the board, but I'm a long-time reader and consistent poster, hence limiting to avatar equipped members would only deter those who don't want to blast through the 500 posts required to get an avatar.
Anyone can blast through 100 posts, but to remain comitted to the forum for 6-12 months means you will weed out those who see the Marketplace as a quick place to scam someone.
I've only got about 190 posts on the board, but I'm a long-time reader and consistent poster, hence limiting to avatar equipped members would only deter those who don't want to blast through the 500 posts required to get an avatar.
I agree that time-since-registration is likely as good as or better than post count, but I'm not sure if vBulletin would support that.
I do encourage people to read a seller's other posts and check his tenure here before buying.
I do encourage people to read a seller's other posts and check his tenure here before buying.
I'm new to this site, but I have quite a few more posts at Mac-Forums. Anyway I got nailed by a guy there for $750.00 the only saving grace was Capitol One gave me my money back then went after his bank for the refund. I don't know what the answer is but personally I won't buy from anyone again on sites, except for ebay, and I know you have to be careful there too.
I like the 100 post to view the marketplace because when MR switched over to the 100 min post requirement it really helped get rid of the spam and fake posts and hopefully with this it will bring real buyers to the marketplace and hopefully have more positive experience at the marketplace.
The only problem with 100 posts to view is if a newbie/member comes here to get their first 'secondhand' Mac, they might not have been in the Mac community long enough to be able to buy the one they spot.
What proportion of Marketplace posts go through without problems?
What proportion of Marketplace posts go through without problems?
Well i will say I have never personally had a problem with a marketplace deal.
One small issue with one but i was compensated when i even told the person it wasn't necessary. So everything has gone great for me personally.
One small issue with one but i was compensated when i even told the person it wasn't necessary. So everything has gone great for me personally.
OutThere said:Problem is, we don't want newbies coming in here all excited to get a mac, buying one in the marketplace for $2,000 and ending up with a M-M-M-MacBook.
Yeah... but if the 'scamming' problem is more with sellers rather than buyers then doesn't that make the answer to make it tougher to sell than to buy? So make it even tougher to start threads but not restrict viewing?
jsw said:For a small fee - no more than 50% - I'll happily act as the middleman. Send the items to me, send the payment to me, and I'll forward each accordingly after taking my share.
I'd hate to see you take up to 50% of an iBook...
Making the Marketplace avatar-only would probably clear up 95% of the problems, but there's also the question if it's fair to other members. For example, I've been here since 2001, yet I still don't have an avatar because I don't post too often.
If these scams keep coming like the are though, something definitely needs to be done.
If these scams keep coming like the are though, something definitely needs to be done.
Blue Velvet said:
Actually I like this idea. A financial stake in MR would show the sincerity perhaps of the sellers.
amacgenius said:
I think it should be based off posts and how long you've been here, not how much you've contributed. If some newbie registers with the intent of scamming people and sees he can post with a donation, he may donate 20 bucks to the site or whatever the amount required is, because he's intending to scam hundreds out of people. The donation is just a slight cost of doing business. I think avatar-only should be able to post, or even read the forums.
Chip NoVaMac said:
I have to throw this out there,
If you really want a contributor's marketplace just make one in the private forums. If you only want to sell to a contributor, you can do that pretty easily. I don't think thats a good solution for the general marketplace.
The big problem is a way to increase the reliability of the sellers while not decreasing the size of the market.
Chip NoVaMac said:
Or a scammer can see a donation as a cost of doing business. What's 20 bucks when you plan on making hundreds?
Don't mean to boast aboout my inattention, but has this been a poll since the thread started?
And if so, why is the thread not taking up the issue raised by the poll?
I think that introducing a feedback system into MR -- even in the Marketplace -- is a dreadful idea for the same reason that rating posts themselves is a dreadful idea.
We are not a marketplace -- we are a community bound by a common thread that happens to contain a marketplace. I worry that introducing a feedback system to one small corner of the site will create the impression that that sub-forum is more important -- or more trustworthy -- than it really is.
It seems to me that in large part we're asking the question "What is the Marketplace, and who is it for?"
To which the Marketplace Rules say:
Such that:
You're not going to keep con-artists out of the marketplace. But, as others have suggested, a marriage of time registered and total posts might make for a Marketplace that more closely lives up to its mission of being a home for "members who already know each other from the forums."
And if so, why is the thread not taking up the issue raised by the poll?
I think that introducing a feedback system into MR -- even in the Marketplace -- is a dreadful idea for the same reason that rating posts themselves is a dreadful idea.
We are not a marketplace -- we are a community bound by a common thread that happens to contain a marketplace. I worry that introducing a feedback system to one small corner of the site will create the impression that that sub-forum is more important -- or more trustworthy -- than it really is.
It seems to me that in large part we're asking the question "What is the Marketplace, and who is it for?"
To which the Marketplace Rules say:
Marketplace Rules said:
Such that:
You're not going to keep con-artists out of the marketplace. But, as others have suggested, a marriage of time registered and total posts might make for a Marketplace that more closely lives up to its mission of being a home for "members who already know each other from the forums."
Why not just close the Marketplace for good, and start a form of classified section where (long time) members, preferably just contributors, can post their hardware/software for sale (or WTB and other deals). Members who want to use the classifieds even should have to send in an application form, positively identify themselves to get permission to post in the classified section. A privilege that could be revoked for (suspected) scammers and those who seems to try to run small businesses of these boards (which never was the intention behind the marketplace, right?)
Eligible members get to post an "ad". No thread with lots of bumping and discussion, all communication between seller and potential buyers could be done using PM/IM/mail, but the seller should be able edit their original "ad" to adjust price/shipping etc. and also tag it as "sold" when done.
Eligible members get to post an "ad". No thread with lots of bumping and discussion, all communication between seller and potential buyers could be done using PM/IM/mail, but the seller should be able edit their original "ad" to adjust price/shipping etc. and also tag it as "sold" when done.
Thank you.
It has been a poll since I started it, and I don't know why it went off on a tangent.
Here's another idea: why not enable the vB Reputation feature and have people with only really good reputations be able to post. That way, only trustworthy people can buy/sell and it your reputation dips your access to the Marketplace is retroactively revoked?
Mitthrawnuruodo said:
I think having to fill out an application form is a bit extreme. Can you imagine the strain that would put on Mods? (or whoever has to read and approve/decline applications) I think the idea is something low-maintenence but effective.
If anything like an application were deemed necessary, perhaps having to fill out a detailed personal information form would be best. At the very least, it would make people think twice about screwing others. But then again, who's to say they don't lie?
A tricky problem indeed.
EDIT: Just caught your post, skoker. What's the deal with this vB Reputation feature? How does that work?
- Status