The middle man would consist of at least 2 well established members.Quote:
Originally Posted by mtdewelf
Printable View
The middle man would consist of at least 2 well established members.Quote:
Originally Posted by mtdewelf
even then, ANYONE can be swayed. I personally would do it w/o a doubt, just stating the facts. Over days/weeks etc. someone can basically be a different person with different morals. No question that peoples beliefs change little by little daily, mostly for the better but WHAT IF's are very important in something like this. My main concern would be for the middle men actually being "attacked" by seller or possibly buyer. Either party can lie and try to pin on middle man, this is where we have the problem becuase to eliminate scam by blaming middle man we have to never doubt.Quote:
Originally Posted by ConcernedMember
Basically to fix the only real problem(blamage of middle man) we possibly create another
great write up prowler.....I think the biggest thing people need to use is common sense!!
Those are very valid points but the inbuilt protection there is that the "middleman/men/whatever you care to call them" never actually has their hands on the product. All they are doing is holding the money until the buyer is satisfied with their purchase. Where I think Phat is trying to go with this wouldn't leave too much (if any) wiggle room for the 3rd Party escrow facilitators for abuse. As they would never have their hands on the actual product(s) being traded the onus for proof of reasonable displeasure regarding said products would lay initially on the buyer.Quote:
Originally Posted by mtdewelf
It would go something like this:
A thorough review of the thread in which the item(s) were originally sold would have to be made to see in what condition the item(s) were presented for sale.
The buyer would then have to provide some form of proof that the condition the items were advertised to have been in isn't the condition in which they arrived on the doorstep of the buyer. Assuming said proof was reasonably provided then it would be up to the seller to somehow prove that the unsatisfactory condition that said purchase arrived in was, in fact, not how that purchase departed the seller's immediate control.
I would not at all feel comfortable with being a Judge, Jury, and Executioner so to speak were there a dispute to arise. I think demanding that both the buyer and seller be a part of that mediation process in the event of some kind of dispute would largely eliminate the possibility of the 3rd Party enacting any sort of abuse or favoritism. Certainly there are bugs to be worked out before the proposal is presented to Goob and/or the moderation team but I do genuinely believe that Phat and I are on the right track with the idea in general. :)
I greatly appreciate your input as well. :)
Good idea, it's just not going to happen.
nG
working on a deal right now that we are going to be using a middle man, i think.Quote:
Originally Posted by ngsm13
Maybe it won't be a forum "rule" to do it but if more of an option.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtdewelf
ConcernedMember and I have no desire to make it compulsory to use this 3rd Party service that we are proposing but rather offer it as an option if one or both parties involved in any given trade has any degree of uncertainty about going ahead with the deal.
Requiring it to be used would be nothing short of ludicrous. As I clearly outlined in the opening post to this thread the percentage of ethical transactions going on here vs the ones that would or should cause someone to take pause is considerably higher (thankfully).
It is these exceptions to the rule for which we would offer a 3rd Party escrow-type service.
alot of buying, all you have to do is use common sense, which im sure most people are aware that for some people on here its limited
my comment was for ngsm since he said it's a good idea but won't happen. It WILL happen but the problem will be that some newer people won't know the difference from reputable people from the people with high post count. In my deal we are going to use nick from SI and have no worries.Quote:
Originally Posted by Prowler573
Honestly i wasn't clear on CM and your details but now that i understand i see small problems that are possible but nothing like what's happening now.
I am very surprised to see no one has mentioned using a local. The interweb is nation wide and I have used a local many times to check merchandise. It may cost you $20 to bribe a local (or just to be nice :) and give them a few bucks), but I've given $20 before to have a reputable forum local member check out a product, especially if expensive.
If Joe Blow has an amp for $400 and Jim Local is an established member and can check it out, $20 is dang good insurance on a $400 purchase.
:)
What if goob implemented the trader rating settings? Its not a sure thing, but *could* potentially help. Its Ebay style ratings, with the availability to make a description of how the transaction went...Smoothly/some bumpiness/bad/etc.
That wouldn't bother me at all. I cannot see it bothering anyone else, either (excepting those that wish to trade dishonestly and those are the ones we're attempting to weed out so who really cares if they don't like it?!? :laugh:)Quote:
Originally Posted by 6spdcoupe
LoL
Weve been using it on Maxima.org and V6P for quite some time and to be completely honest it has helped. Even if it only saves a few people it did its job.
If it saves only 1 single person from getting wrongly separated from their hard-earned cash it did its job IMO :fyi:
Heres some of the hack info if anyone wants to introduce it to him. Although Im sure hes active on VB.org..
http://www.vbulletin.org/forum/showt...trader+ratings