Should the price in For Sale threads be undeletable after the sale is completed?

[Steven Tribe]

Apologies if this has been up before!

I note that it has become common for the more commercial listers to "clean-up" after them. Now we have attracted a number of these and they are often a very welcome addition. It has become almost standard practice to write SOLD in the first posting and, at the same time, delete the original price.

For various reasons, some auctioneers do not allow access to sale prices at previous auctions. Ebay certainly conceals the results of BIN/Best Offer sales. I suppose this has become an automatic carry-over

I am not asking for a commitment to give the actual agreed price, just retain the original price!
I think it is a little foolish that we recommend people asking for valuations of equipment, that they should check completed sales at Ebay and other and check "our excellent FS section" to get an idea of value.

One solution would be to insist on prices being in title.
But people hate changes in the two commercial sections!

[Jim Noel]

I think actual sale price should be displayed.

[Steven Tribe]

That is my personal view as well!

[Oren Grad]

Our policy has been that those who post in FS or WTB are free to delete closed listings, or their content, if they wish.

From time to time people have asked privately about deleting such posts. When those questions have been directed to me, generally I've pointed out that the listings do have ongoing value as reference material on prices and, occasionally, on the existence, features and appearance of more exotic items. But people can also have strong reasons for wanting to delete the content - beyond commercial reasons, privacy considerations can also be important for some non-commercial sellers. There is inevitably a tradeoff to be made, and we leave it up to each individual to decide for themselves.

[Oren Grad]

I think actual sale price should be displayed.

Sorry, but we're not going there.

The rules we have for FS/WTB are designed to get as close to a level playing field operationally as we can reasonably manage within the substantial constraints imposed by our Forum software, while minimizing net grief for the moderators and for members. A sale-price-reporting rule would be no help in either respect.

[Steven Tribe]

Yes, that is certainly the answer I expected!

I find the "privacy" argument completely fallacious as members here can have complete anonymity through their chosen "names" or set-up an extra lfpf identity for commercial activity if they have used real names.

[Tin Can]

I agree with Oren.

Sales of anything between buyer and seller need only satisfy each other.

I specifically ask buyers and sellers to keep our private business private.

I also ask for no comment in the Buy/Sell advisory section. Unless they want to.

I will post positive comment only if they desire and tell them to comment negatively about me if they wish.

One big rule about the FS/WTB is the admin and mods want no part in our business.

Obviously some could glean data in initial offerings as a price is always required.

eBay seems to have disappeared everything 3 years old or less.

How much is that doggy in the window (https://youtu.be/2AkLE4X-bbU)...

[Steven Tribe]

Sorry, but we're not going there.

The rules we have for FS/WTB are designed to maintain as close an approximation to a level playing field operationally as we can reasonably manage within the substantial constraints imposed by our Forum software, while minimizing net grief for the moderators and for members. A sale-price-reporting rule would be no help in either respect.

Which is why I didn't suggest it!
Putting the price in the title would certainly be a doable thing.

[Oren Grad]

...or set-up an extra lfpf identity for commercial activity if they have used real names.

No. Use of multiple registrations on the Forum for any reason is strictly prohibited.

[Oren Grad]

Putting the price in the title would certainly be a doable thing.

Members are welcome to do that if they wish...

EDIT: ...but to be clear, we're not going to make it an obligation.

[Tin Can]

And that's a really bad idea!



Members are welcome to do that if they wish.

[ic-racer]

So, it functions like a 'Dating Site' where you publicly post a solicitation and carry out the transaction in private, deleting the trail.

I misunderstood the forum here as an instrument for sharing information and ideas.

[neil poulsen]

I think there's much to be gained by keeping it simple. The FS/FT forum is a listing service, period. By it's nature, such a listing is public, and I think it's reasonable to have a framework around how that public listing can occur.

What can ensue is a conversation between two members about that listing, and by it's own nature, that conversation is private. I do not think it makes sense to have some sort of defined framework around how a private conversation should occur, or what should be reported from such a conversation.