Page 4 of 13 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 124

Thread: Mistake: new rule about FS comments

  1. #31
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Massachusetts USA
    Posts
    6,763

    Re: Mistake: new rule about FS comments

    Quote Originally Posted by Noah A View Post
    What about if we get ripped off as I recently did on a lens purchase? May I respond in a public post after the sale or would that be considered 'rude'?
    That is a separate matter. Loosely coupled, but separate. Did any of the moderators intrude in that thread ?

    The spirit of this rule is fairly obvious and straightforward. As always, 99.9% of forum members will use good judgement and rarely create any turbulence. For the few with poor social skills, we have rules.

  2. #32

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    724

    Re: Mistake: new rule about FS comments

    Quote Originally Posted by Frank Petronio View Post
    So when someone wants to sell their $2000 Master Technika and somebody comes along and posts that it is only worth $1500 to them and that one sold on eBay last week for $1475, etc. but the seller still wants $2000 for their camera, and can wait a few weeks until the right buyer comes along, these negative comments would make it much more difficult for them to maintain their price. At least in an auction the buyer sets the price - in your proposed Utopian community the uninvolved (but benevolent and wise!) mob set the prices for you.
    But what happens when that so-called Master Technika is really a modified Tech IV? Would pointing out that it's not a Master be considered a "negative" post and therefore be banned? I agree with you that it's annoying when people second-guess your price. But if a post actually adds valuable information that was missing (or wrong) in the ad, then it may be a service to the community.

  3. #33
    funkadelic
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Nashville, TN
    Posts
    1,242

    Re: Mistake: new rule about FS comments

    For whatever it's worth, I agree with the OP. The community tends to be self-regulating. I find FS comment posts enlightening for the most part (except for the "bump" posts)... either by clarifying equipment identification and features, or by identifying people I can ignore later. Either way, I win.
    This new rule changes that.

  4. #34
    Salt Nerd
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Salt Lake City
    Posts
    562

    Re: Mistake: new rule about FS comments

    No one can deny the education we all received when a certain lens that had been cracked all the way through on the front element was sold here recently. For some it was very enlightening, for others it was a blood-bath. For the OP it was great publicity and he ended up selling his lens. I look at that as a win-win-win. All parties got something out of it.
    Michael Slade

  5. #35

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    724

    Re: Mistake: new rule about FS comments

    Quote Originally Posted by Ken Lee View Post
    That is a separate matter. Loosely coupled, but separate. Did any of the moderators intrude in that thread ?

    The spirit of this rule is fairly obvious and straightforward. As always, 99.9% of forum members will use good judgement and rarely create any turbulence. For the few with poor social skills, we have rules.
    I haven't made any such post yet but it was a sincere question as I may want to make a public post on the sale thread once the paypal claim is resolved.

  6. #36

    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    9,477

    Re: Mistake: new rule about FS comments

    Quote Originally Posted by Noah A View Post
    But what happens when that so-called Master Technika is really a modified Tech IV? Would pointing out that it's not a Master be considered a "negative" post and therefore be banned? I agree with you that it's annoying when people second-guess your price. But if a post actually adds valuable information that was missing (or wrong) in the ad, then it may be a service to the community.
    I'm not a moderator but that seems a place for them to make a logical call. There is a difference between stating a fact (That is a jerk trying to sell a Tech IV for a lot of money, like that red one a while ago) and stating an opinion.

    Obviously you have to call out the Nigerian Oil Schemes and cell phone sales.

    I got hosed on another forum's for sale and called the guy out. He defended himself with lies, which confused the issue but at least his future buyers will be more careful. Perhaps a feedback system is in order?

    But, overall, I bet this Buy and Sell Section works better than most others and I don't see how "adding" negatives would be positive.

  7. #37

    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Western NC
    Posts
    649

    Re: Mistake: new rule about FS comments

    While we're at it, could we ban "PM sent"? That's like a dog pissing on a rock.

  8. #38
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Massachusetts USA
    Posts
    6,763

    Re: Mistake: new rule about FS comments

    Almost all of us know - without instruction - when a comment crosses the line.

    When that happens, there is now a guideline which can be cited.

    Moderators remove only a small fraction of postings, and we can all expect that pattern to continue.

  9. #39

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    1,328

    Re: Mistake: new rule about FS comments

    Quote Originally Posted by Frank Petronio View Post
    I'm not a moderator but that seems a place for them to make a logical call. There is a difference between stating a fact (That is a jerk trying to sell a Tech IV for a lot of money, like that red one a while ago) and stating an opinion.
    I doubt that the moderators would like to assume any responsibility for the accurate description of the merchandise peddled in the FS section.

  10. #40

    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    9,477

    Re: Mistake: new rule about FS comments

    Quote Originally Posted by Sevo View Post
    I doubt that the moderators would like to assume any responsibility for the accurate description of the merchandise peddled in the FS section.
    And we'd be better served by self-proclaimed experts stating their opinions as facts?

Similar Threads

  1. Excluding sections from "new posts" view?
    By Winger in forum Feedback
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 20-Feb-2012, 07:14
  2. Scheimpflug Rule
    By raylamsk in forum On Photography
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 20-Jul-2007, 11:31
  3. The one third into the scene rule
    By Leonard Evens in forum Style & Technique
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 27-Jul-2006, 06:52
  4. Gitzo 3 leg sections vs. 4 leg sections
    By Josh Divack in forum Gear
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 13-Dec-2001, 08:49
  5. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 12-May-2001, 00:58

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •