PDA

View Full Version : Classifieds?



Todd Caudle
15-Sep-2003, 22:07
What a great forum. Just curious: Would a user-to-user LF classified section work here? Is that something you mods would be interested in including?

Capocheny
15-Sep-2003, 23:22
ABSOLUTELY... it only makes sense that one would look on a Large Format website to purchase Large Format camera gear from its members.

Cheers

QT Luong
15-Sep-2003, 23:51
I have thought about lauching an additional forum dedicated to classifieds, services, workshop announcements, etc... but this would require some modification to the software, since by nature the postings would have a limited format and useful lifetime. There is nothing worse than wading through a list of obsolete classifieds. So, yes, it is a possibility I have in mind, but not for now.

Jorge Gasteazoro
16-Sep-2003, 00:02
Well, over at APUG we have a "for sale" forum, and my experince is that it is not used very much, a few dealers tried it but since they did not get quick offers they gave up. I dont know if it would be worth it to change the program to introduce this forum for a few ads, but then I dont know how difficult it would be to do this. Most people get quicker results at e bay.

Frank Petronio
16-Sep-2003, 07:13
The photo.net Leica forum allows for sale ads from individuals - surprisingly it isn't abused - maybe the people here could be trusted to moderate themselves?

David R Munson
16-Sep-2003, 10:47
I like the idea of having a place to sell/swap LF gear with other forum members. I'd much rather have a separate forum specifically for that purpose, though, than have this board cluttered with FS and WTB threads.

David A. Goldfarb
16-Sep-2003, 10:54
I'd also support a separate forum for equipment sales and commercial announcements, rather than having them in the main forum.

Alec Jones
16-Sep-2003, 11:46
How about limiting FS and WTB ads to Friday? Also, I recommend that FA ads be prohibited.

Richard Stum / Kinesis
16-Sep-2003, 12:09
Can we then just post any classified stuff on this forum? I have a Linhof system I'm trying to unload for someone else.

george lottermoser
16-Sep-2003, 12:23
On the LUG (Leica User Group) Buy/Sell Posts are allowed only on Fridays. FS or WTB in the subject allows the uninterested to delete. I would support these types of limitations for posting Buy/Sell's

Tom Westbrook
16-Sep-2003, 12:24
No, classifieds are not allowed. See the posting guidelines:

http://largeformatphotography.info/lfforum/help.html#guidel

It just results in dated material cluttering up what's intended to be an place for more enduring info.

David A. Goldfarb
16-Sep-2003, 12:28
Here's another idea--How about just devoting a few threads to classifieds? Rather than having a new thread for each item for sale or want-to-buy or commercial workshop announcement, we could have one "For Sale" thread, one "Want to Buy" thread, and one "Workshop Announcements" thread, so they wouldn't clutter up the board, and yet would be easy to find and would require no new programming.

Perhaps there might be a note about this on the "Ask a New Question" page with links to the three or however many threads to be devoted to classifieds.

QT Luong
16-Sep-2003, 13:01
David, your idea addresses cluttering of the board, but those threads would still need maintainance. The problem is that the maintainance has to be done by the users, since only they know whether the item has already sold, and currently the software has no provision for that. That's what I meant by need for new software features. I recognize that the case of workshop announcements might be different, since those have a set date.

David A. Goldfarb
16-Sep-2003, 13:31
Fair enough. Is it possible to time limit posts, so that old posts in a thread would expire after six months, say, and then if the items were still unsold the poster could repost? I'm not that enthusiastic myself about having classifieds on the list, but I'm not too bothered by them either, if they can be contained.

Mark Muse
16-Sep-2003, 15:00
I like the idea of having them "expire", can the software handle that as an automatic action without deleting other types of posts that have expired? I think 6 months is far too long though. I think more like 1 month. It can always be reposted by the owner if it is still for sale or wanted.

Christopher Condit
17-Sep-2003, 16:21
Who amongst us looking to buy or sell, potentially here, would not also check out eBay? What is the advantage in having to look in two places? Ebay does their job just fine, and the high volume is the best guarantee to everyone of fair prices. Let's leave the job to them.

CXC

Sal Santamaura
17-Sep-2003, 20:03
Ditto Christopher Condit.

Kirk Gittings
15-May-2011, 19:23
Ron, This belongs in the For/Sale WTB section

Kevin J. Kolosky
30-May-2011, 23:22
Although I accept it because I have to, I think that the rule barring people from asking for offers on their for sale items is ridiculous. I think that because based on my experience almost 100% of the time when I have posted an article for sale both here and on many other sites I get numerous "offers" by personal mail, or PM, or whatever you want to call it. Why hide what is actually going on with a rule? Why hide the truth. To look good? To allow moderators to exercise some power by deleting a post?
The so called rules here state that people use the classified at their own risk. There should be no interference in private commerce between people that want to buy and people that want to sell.

Darin Boville
30-May-2011, 23:40
The so called rules here state that people use the classified at their own risk. There should be no interference in private commerce between people that want to buy and people that want to sell.

The rule is a good one--keeps things a little more honest and wastes a little less time. If you are looking for a free market system you'd better buy an economic textbook--that's the only place they exist. :)

btw, reading this thread from LFF's earlier days was fun.

--Darin

Kevin J. Kolosky
30-May-2011, 23:52
How does it keep things more honest? Honesty is in the mind of the parties, not in the rule itself. What does this have to do with free market systems?

Darin Boville
31-May-2011, 00:00
How does it keep things more honest? Honesty is in the mind of the parties, not in the rule itself.

One example. There was just a thread about a guy trying to buy a lens. The seller took his offer to buy and shopped it around to other interested parties, looking for a higher offer.



What does this have to do with free market systems?

Because you said "there should be no interference in private commerce between people that want to buy and people that want to sell" which smacks of free market ideology.

--Darin

Kevin J. Kolosky
31-May-2011, 00:11
Well, I am not going to argue political philosophy here. You have your ideas and I have mine. Nevertheless, if the rules state that people are to use the classifieds at their own risk, that implies a free market. The more rules one makes the more one impedes commerce. And as I stated before, most of the time the price isn't accepted anyway. Instead, a PM is sent making an offer, usually for a lower price. that certainly sounds like free market to me.

Its like a lot of other rules. In my opinion the exist to make things look what they aren't.

Lachlan 717
31-May-2011, 01:44
I'm just playing Devil's Advocate here, but if you have to place a price on FS, why don't you have to add your maximum price in WTB threads?

Lighten up: add your FS price, haggle behind the scenes, then get on with shooting.

Ralph Barker
31-May-2011, 06:11
Well, I am not going to argue political philosophy here. You have your ideas and I have mine. Nevertheless, if the rules state that people are to use the classifieds at their own risk, that implies a free market. The more rules one makes the more one impedes commerce. And as I stated before, most of the time the price isn't accepted anyway. Instead, a PM is sent making an offer, usually for a lower price. that certainly sounds like free market to me.

Its like a lot of other rules. In my opinion the exist to make things look what they aren't.

Kevin, the essence of this forum isn't about commerce or "free market" - it's about large format photography education. The classified section was created as a convenience to members. But, the forum software doesn't provide the "safeguards" usually associated with "auction" sites, so we require listings to have a stated price. What people choose to do privately with regard to transactions is, of course, up to them. Those actions, however, are not "sanctioned" by the forum management.

BetterSense
31-May-2011, 06:35
One example. There was just a thread about a guy trying to buy a lens. The seller took his offer to buy and shopped it around to other interested parties, looking for a higher offer.

Is this considered unethical? I'm honestly wondering. I didn't know there was an ethical obligation to take less than the best price for an item, or an ethical limitation on asking for offers.

onnect17
31-May-2011, 06:38
Kevin posted a price and still the moderators deleted his post. :(
So I guess the rule in reality is not only "all the FS posts should include a price". It's also "if the moderator likes it, then it survives the delete button"

So looking from the other side, is not a violation of the rules to delete a post that listed a price?
If the price is a joke, what is the definition of a serious price?

Kevin J. Kolosky
31-May-2011, 07:10
I agree. This is a forum for large format photography. I have not forgotten that.

However, large format photography is almost 100% practiced by adults. People who should be considered wise enough to take care of theirselves. People who have already been through the rigors of purchasing equipment and supplies, not to mention all of the other things that they require to live and survive in today's world.

So, a person here sees an ad that says "make an offer". If that person does not like to purchase equipment that way, the person ignors the ad and moves on to other things. However, if the person is intrigued by what is being offered for an offer he makes an offer, at his own risk as the rules provide, and perhaps he is able to purchase what he wants for a good deal.

In other words, those who don't like it don't have to use it. What is so damn hard about that.

I put $1,000,000 and $10,000,000 prices on my ads. They were removed. How is that any different than if I would have put $5,000 or $2000 or any amount that would not have attracted "OFFERS"? How is it any different from a price that would have attracted "Offers".

I will sell the stuff someplace else. No problem. But I feel sorry for those who cannot move past a post that they do not agree with but instead feel the need to make rules for everybody else who would like to trade that way.

FORUMS were started a long long time ago. One of their purposes was to seek the truth.
I notice that here that is not the case. The moderators are always right even if they are wrong!!!!!!!!

Roger Thoms
31-May-2011, 10:20
This is a private forum, the rule for stating the selling price is clear, and yet you choose to break it. Then when warned that your post would be deleted if you didn't state the selling price you put in $10,000,000. Basically a big FU to the moderators, and now you seem upset.

Roger

Kevin J. Kolosky
31-May-2011, 11:12
Im not upset. I have no ill will toward anyone. If I would have wanted to say FU to the moderators I would have said FU to the moderators. I'm just seeking truth.

I have been told this is a "private" forum. By the way, who pays for it? Who really owns it? Is it a corporation? A partnership? A sole proprietor?

The original idea behind a forum (Roman) was an open discussion. Seems to me that if there are limitations on openness the "forum" really isn't a forum, but rather a controlled discourse.

Kevin J. Kolosky
31-May-2011, 12:22
Ah, thats what this forum should be. People expressing their opinions. Good for you.

Leigh
31-May-2011, 12:28
And you are?
A member who follows the rules, and gets pissed off at others who think the rules don't apply to them.

I note you edited your post and changed the content after I quoted it.

- Leigh

Kevin J. Kolosky
31-May-2011, 12:50
Yes, I did change my post. Wanted to know who you were. Glad to hear your a member who follows the rules and gets pissed off when people don't agree with you.
I am happy for you.

By the way, I don't think I said the rules don't apply to me. Or at least I didn't mean that.
Rather, what I was saying was that I didn't agree with the logic behind the rules.

Kevin J. Kolosky
31-May-2011, 13:06
A member who follows the rules, and gets pissed off at others who think the rules don't apply to them.

I note you edited your post and changed the content after I quoted it.

- Leigh

After further review of the rules, I must change what I said in my last post, because it appears that you are a member that does not follow the rules.

The rules state: " Maintaining Forum Decorum. To have a healthy and informative forum, it's essential that participants maintain a respectful and professional decorum. Name calling, personal attacks, character assassination, coarse or inappropriate language, or enticing/baiting others to violate forum guidelines will not be tolerated here. Generally speaking, in responding to a posting, try to respond only to the content of the thread and not to the individual."

But you called me a "self centered egotistical jerk".

That language would appear to be against the rules. So perhaps you are pissed off at yourself for breaking the rules.

I myself am fine with it.

Ole Tjugen
31-May-2011, 13:34
...
I have been told this is a "private" forum. By the way, who pays for it? Who really owns it? Is it a corporation? A partnership? A sole proprietor?

The original idea behind a forum (Roman) was an open discussion. Seems to me that if there are limitations on openness the "forum" really isn't a forum, but rather a controlled discourse.

This forum, like all other internet forums, is privately owned and run. The owner is ultimately the one who sets the rules, which are generally enforced by a team of moderators. Rather like the Roman forum, come to think of it..

In the Roman forum, you risked assassination if your statements were unpopular. Here, we are rather more bloodless.

Leigh
31-May-2011, 13:51
I am happy for you.
Thank you. I appreciate your good wishes.

- Leigh

Kevin J. Kolosky
31-May-2011, 14:15
Everybody keeps saying this site is privately owned. Who owns it?

Kirk Gittings
31-May-2011, 14:43
QT Luong owns it. In 12 years on this forum you never figured that out?

Kevin J. Kolosky
31-May-2011, 15:11
No I didn't. It takes a lot of money to keep a server going, and from what I could see Mr. Luong didn't have that kind of money. Now I know. Good enough.

Kirk Gittings
31-May-2011, 15:14
Server space is donated.

Kerry L. Thalmann
31-May-2011, 16:28
No I didn't. It takes a lot of money to keep server going, and from what I could see Mr. Luong doesn't have that kind of money. Now I know. Good enough.
From the forum FAQ (http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/faq.php?faq=vb_board_usage#faq_who_faq_item):

"This forum was started in 1997, by Quang-Tuan Luong, using server, bandwidth, and forum software (Lusenet) provided generously for free by Philip Greenspun to the internet community. Since then, the forum moved to a new server..."

"Special thanks to Brian Reid, who provides the server space and bandwidth for the forum..."

There are more details at the link provided. If you're really interested in who owns and operates this forum, I recommend you read it.

This forum has always existed thanks to the generosity of a few kind souls who have donated their time and financial resources to keep it alive and running. You will notice that, unlike other internet forums, there are no banner ads, no pop-up ads, no ads of any kind and no subscription fees. It is one of the true totally free things in life.

Those who put in the time and money to make this forum possible get to set the rules. Those who get to participate in this forum, free of charge, should be courteous enough to obey those very simple, clearly started rules and not make more work for those who donate their time to keep this forum operating.

Kerry

Kevin J. Kolosky
31-May-2011, 18:16
From the forum FAQ (http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/faq.php?faq=vb_board_usage#faq_who_faq_item):

"This forum was started in 1997, by Quang-Tuan Luong, using server, bandwidth, and forum software (Lusenet) provided generously for free by Philip Greenspun to the internet community. Since then, the forum moved to a new server..."

"Special thanks to Brian Reid, who provides the server space and bandwidth for the forum..."

And doesn't that space and bandwith come from paid subscribers?

There are more details at the link provided. If you're really interested in who owns and operates this forum, I recommend you read it.

Thank you, I will

This forum has always existed thanks to the generosity of a few kind souls who have donated their time and financial resources to keep it alive and running. You will notice that, unlike other internet forums, there are no banner ads, no pop-up ads, no ads of any kind and no subscription fees. It is one of the true totally free things in life.

Its not totally free if its censored.

Those who put in the time and money to make this forum possible get to set the rules. Those who get to participate in this forum, free of charge, should be courteous enough to obey those very simple, clearly started rules and not make more work for those who donate their time to keep this forum operating.

I have been courteous. My argument has been about issues, not people. I have no problem with obeying the rules. That doesn't mean I agree with them.

I would much rather pay a monthly fee to avoid censorship. But thats just my opinion.

Kirk Gittings
31-May-2011, 18:25
There are plenty of forums where you can do both. Have at it. Or start your own.

And there are no paid subscribers. There is not a dime made off the ownership or moderation of this forum. Where have you been for the past 12 years.

onnect17
31-May-2011, 18:39
I would much rather pay a monthly fee to avoid censorship. But thats just my opinion.

Me too.

Kevin J. Kolosky
31-May-2011, 19:09
There are plenty of forums where you can do both. Have at it. Or start your own.

I don't have any wealthy benefactors or I would

And there are no paid subscribers. There is not a dime made off the ownership or moderation of this forum. Where have you been for the past 12 years.

I didn't say that a dime was made on this forum. My perception is that this forum is on the server of another forum that charges money for that forum in some way, shape, or form. If I am incorrect in that perception then I admit I am wrong in my perception. The money has to come from somewhere. I admit its really none of my business, other than that everyone is telling me how grateful I should be to the ownership of this forum, and all I simply want to know is just exactly who is footing the bill so I can be grateful to him, or her.

Darin Boville
31-May-2011, 21:57
>>and all I simply want to know is just exactly who is footing the bill so I can be grateful to him, or her.<<

I thought all you wanted to do was sell a camera? Now you are just thankful? Sounds like you just want to pick a fight.

--Darin

Kerry L. Thalmann
31-May-2011, 23:16
I would much rather pay a monthly fee to avoid censorship. But thats just my opinion.

Then find another forum that offers that option. This one doesn't. As has been clearly stated, there are no paid subscriptions to this forum. APUG offers paid subscriptions and has a classifieds section, although they generally request (but don't require) a donation (generally 3% of sale price is recommended) on all sales made through their forums.

Since this is a privately owned forum, there is no such thing as censorship. No one is preventing you from saying anything you want - they just don't want to pay for the resources. Start your own forum, pay for the server space and bandwidth, spend many hours maintaining it and you can say anything you want and make your own. Now that's the free market at work.

Those that own and operate this forum have absolutely no responsibility to provide you a free soap box for your opinions. If you find that unacceptable, make your own soap box.

I'm not trying to be rude or make you feel unwelcome. Everyone is welcome here - as long as they play by the clearly stated rules. If you find those rules onerous, there are alternatives (photo.net, APUG, etc.). Of course, those alternatives also have their own rules.

Honestly, I don't see what the big deal is. Don't like the rules for posting in the classifieds? Want to get the "best offer" for your lenses? Post them on eBay.

Kerry

Kerry L. Thalmann
31-May-2011, 23:25
everyone is telling me how grateful I should be to the ownership of this forum, and all I simply want to know is just exactly who is footing the bill so I can be grateful to him, or her.

Did you read what I posted? Did you read the FAQ?

"Special thanks to Brian Reid, who provides the server space and bandwidth for the forum..."

I'm not sure how to state it any more clearly.

Brian Reid "foots the bill". You should be grateful to him. You should also be grateful to Tuan Luong for creating this forum and and the static pages at this site for the thousands of hours he's put in without compensation for the benefit of the large format community. You should be grateful to Philip Geenspun, who donated the server space for the original version of this forum. Much of the archives would not be available if not for Philip. You should be grateful to Tom Westbrook and to Bjorn Nilsson for their technical contributions to the creation and maintenance of this forum. You should also be grateful to the volunteer forum moderators who donate their time to keep things running smoothly.

There's probably several more who deserve your gratitude, but that should get you started.

Kerry

Leigh
1-Jun-2011, 01:02
I admit its really none of my business...
Well said.

- Leigh

Kevin J. Kolosky
1-Jun-2011, 07:29
I was able to locate the information pages that it has been suggested that I read.

As I stated before I will obey the rules because I have to, although I don't agree with them.

I tried to click on the link for Brian Reid and it didn't get anywhere.

I already am a member of Photonet

Thank you for the lively discussion.

Kirk Gittings
1-Jun-2011, 07:49
There's probably several more who deserve your gratitude, but that should get you started.

Kerry

Who else deserves our gratitude? The members who don't just follow the rules but who actively participate in moderation by bringing to our attention problem posts and threads-such as those who pointed out the problem with Kevin's thread. The moderators can't possibly read every post and these contributions are essential.

As Amy pointed out once. The rules and moderation are all that stand between this forum and chaos.

sanking
1-Jun-2011, 07:54
As Amy pointed out once. The rules and moderation are all that stand between this forum and chaos.

We could say the same about any good society. When the cats abandon their litter boxes and start spraying on the floor and walls, chaos is not far away.

Sandy

Darin Boville
1-Jun-2011, 08:56
>>The rules and moderation are all that stand between this forum and chaos.<<

I think you may be talking about the think blue line of police protection.

--Darin

Kevin J. Kolosky
1-Jun-2011, 09:02
As Amy pointed out once. The rules and moderation are all that stand between this forum and chaos.
__________________

That is a very subjective opinion, but I can see where it would be adopted by any number of people.

Kirk Gittings
1-Jun-2011, 09:20
Do you have any idea how much spam we have to manually remove from this site?

You don't remember the time when 6 or 7 out of 10 threads were political arguments? New people couldn't figure out what this site was about. LF discussions were in a minority.

And...(drum roll).....if you haven't been physically threatened or threatened with a law suit, it is possibly because we have taken a no nonsense approach and banned all the aholes who were doing such things.

sanking
1-Jun-2011, 09:37
Do you have any idea how much spam we have to manually remove from this site?

You don't remember the time when 6 or 7 out of 10 threads were political arguments? New people couldn't figure out what this site was about. LF discussions were in a minority.

And...(drum roll).....if you haven't been physically threatened or threatened with a law suit, it is possibly because we have taken a no nonsense approach and banned all the aholes who were doing such things.

Good for you fellows. I remember a time when the LF forum was not moderated nearly as well as it is today and there was a lot of nasty threads. Things really started to improve when Kirk was added to the moderation team, and later Ken Lee. And I say that even though I have been known to disagree about a number of things with the rules. But from my perpective a forum of this size really needs good, objective and fair moderation to enforce the rules.

And if the rules don't work for you, you can walk with your finger. The internet is a big place, learn to use it.

Course, I do believe some place exists for reasonable discussion of the rules.

Sandy

Sal Santamaura
1-Jun-2011, 12:36
Do you have any idea how much spam we have to manually remove from this site?...Recent activity in this thread as well as a burdensome workload on our volunteer moderators prompts restatement of the position Christopher and I took above, now 7-1/2 years later.

Eliminate the For Sale/Wanted category. Leave commerce to commercial Web sites.

Ash
1-Jun-2011, 12:49
NOOOO SAL!! This site's classifieds has saved (and cost) me a fortune.

Eric James
1-Jun-2011, 12:52
Recent activity in this thread as well as a burdensome workload on our volunteer moderators prompts restatement of the position Christopher and I took above, now 7-1/2 years later.

Eliminate the For Sale/Wanted category. Leave commerce to commercial Web sites.


This in response to Kirk's statement about spam? I see very little spam in the classifieds - most spammers are new members who haven't gained access to the classifieds.

The classifieds are a wonderful resource. I'd like to thank the founder, the server donor and the moderators for making it possible.

Sal Santamaura
1-Jun-2011, 13:12
NOOOO SAL!!...


This in response to Kirk's statement about spam? I see very little spam in the classifieds...No, it's in response to problems that result from mere existence of a classifieds category, Kevin's attitude/complaint being just one of many. I quoted Kirk simply to highlight the moderators' workload. Please read what I wrote in its entirety:


Recent activity in this thread as well as a burdensome workload on our volunteer moderators prompts restatement of the position Christopher and I took above, now 7-1/2 years later.

Eliminate the For Sale/Wanted category. Leave commerce to commercial Web sites.I didn't expect any more agreement now than when my position was unpopular before the category existed. However, since events in the interim seem to validate such opposition, it seemed worth repeating.

Kerry L. Thalmann
1-Jun-2011, 13:30
No, it's in response to problems that result from mere existence of a classifieds category, Kevin's attitude/complaint being just one of many. I quoted Kirk simply to highlight the moderators' workload. Please read what I wrote in its entirety:

I didn't expect any more agreement now than when my position was unpopular before the category existed. However, since events in the interim seem to validate such opposition, it seemed worth repeating.

Sal,

I understand your comments, but I respectfully disagree. The fact that this thread sat idle for seven and a half years, without any complaints about the classified section, speaks volumes for how well it works. It also reinforces that the rules put in place when the classifieds section was started, were indeed good and effective.

Of course, as Kirk mentioned, there is behind the scenes moderation to eliminate/block spam, but I think eliminating the political forums probably unburdened the moderators much more than eliminating the classifieds section would. I also think the 30 day membership requirement before posting in the classifieds eliminates most of the fly by spammers.

Personally, I think the classifieds section is a great resource to this community. I have bought from my fellow forum members through the classifieds many times in the past and am now using them to sell a lot of the equipment I've acquired over the last 25 years. I'd MUCH rather sell here, to people I feel I know, that on eBay. I like knowing that the equipment I sell will be used and appreciated. If I wanted to get the absolute maximum for everything I'm selling, and wanted to spend less effort on pre and post sales support, I'd just use eBay and be done with it. I prefer to use the classifieds and have been happy with the results.

It also helps establish market prices for many of the unusual items that aren't commonly available elsewhere. And that can help both buyers and sellers determine prices for future purchases/sales.

But, if the burden of the classifieds ever puts too much strain on the volunteers who generously donate their time to moderating this forum, I'll certainly support their decision. It's their time they donate and would be unfair and ungracious of me to tell them how to spend it.

Kerry

Lachlan 717
1-Jun-2011, 13:40
One benefit that hasn't been noted about the Classified section is its ability to introduce me to previously unknown equipment.

I have learned lots by looking at items for sale.

It is also occasionally good for a laugh (like when people want $600 for a Jobo drum!)

Eric James
1-Jun-2011, 13:42
If your goal is to minimize the moderators' workload, a shotgun approach such as yours would be effective, but at what cost to the community? I don't utilize the business forum and that's where I see a lot of spam being posted; should I petition for it's removal? Announcement = Nike shoes - gone; Digital Hardware = Nokia phones - trash it; Resourses: Viagra - delete it.

I think it's admirable that you're concerned about the moderator's workload, but I suspect that they knew what they were getting themselves into when they agreed to participate. Their work is appreciated and we should respect there time and effort by adhering to the forum's few rules and guidelines.

Kevin J. Kolosky
1-Jun-2011, 13:43
"And if the rules don't work for you, you can walk with your finger. The internet is a big place, learn to use it."
___________________________

A somewhat valid point of view, although I think the second sentence is uneeded.


However, it ignors the opposite point of view that in any rational society all voices should be heard.

The opposite point of view, which I think is also somewhat valid is, "if you don't like what you are seeing in a thread, don't read it." Move on to the next thread that you do like.

Curt Palm
1-Jun-2011, 15:04
"And if the rules don't work for you, you can walk with your finger. The internet is a big place, learn to use it."
___________________________

A somewhat valid point of view, although I think the second sentence is uneeded.


However, it ignors the opposite point of view that in any rational society all voices should be heard.

....




If I'm following this correctly, one should be able to go into a Toyota dealership showroom and give a long speech on how superior Fords are to Toyotas and not be removed from the showroom?

onnect17
1-Jun-2011, 15:52
Remember when the dozens of posts in the thread "Looking for Kerry Thalmann" suddenly disappeared?

I can see long and thoughtful comments posted by Kerry on this thread about following the rules. Ironic, isn't?

Kerry L. Thalmann
1-Jun-2011, 16:02
Remember when the dozens of posts in the thread "Looking for Kerry Thalmann" suddenly disappeared?

I can see long and thoughtful comments posted by Kerry on this thread about following the rules. Ironic, isn't?

I'm not sure what your point it. I didn't break any forum rules. A very expensive package got lost in the mail. A full refund had been issued through PayPal three days before that thread was started. In the end, the matter was resolved to the buyer's satisfaction and I was out $800.00. I'm not sure how that is at all relevant to this thread.

Since it's not, I'll leave it up to the moderators if they want to delete your post and my response. Or, if they want to leave them, that's OK to. It's their call.

Kerry

onnect17
1-Jun-2011, 16:07
Why your response is not part of the original thread is beyond me. For 3 or 4 days everybody was wondering if something bad happen to you and if there was any way any members in the area could help you. I'm sure other members are glad to know what really happen. Thanks for letting us know.

Could be great if the moderators move your explanation to the original thread "Looking for..." and then delete the posts in this thread.

Again, thanks for the clarification.

Lachlan 717
1-Jun-2011, 16:10
Remember when the dozens of posts in the thread "Looking for Kerry Thalmann" suddenly disappeared?

I can see long and thoughtful comments posted by Kerry on this thread about following the rules. Ironic, isn't?

I have been fortunate enough to have several dealings with Kerry over a number of years, and can say without a shadow of doubt that he is a truly honest person whose bucketload of integrity runneth over.

In addition, his "Future Classic" information has given me (and I suspect many, many others) great insight and comfort when it came to choosing equipment. The time that he spends advising and assisting others is testament to his integrity.

Like Kerry, I have no idea what your point was, but, on the off-chance you're shitcanning him, or his role within this Forum, expect me to champion his cause, not yours.

If you're making another point, perhaps clarify it by clearly stating it, rather than hiding it in rhetoric questions?

Kerry L. Thalmann
1-Jun-2011, 16:26
Why your response is not part of the original thread is beyond me. For 3 or 4 days everybody was wondering if something bad happen to you and if there was any way any members in the area could help you. I'm sure others member are glad to know what really happen. Thanks for letting us know.

It was a private transaction between two individuals that was resolved to everyone's satisfaction. I don't see why the details are anyone else's business. It was the one time in over 20 years and thousands of packages that the USPS actually lost a package I mailed and was not able to locate it. Dealing with first the USPS and then PayPal took a lot of time (and energy). Neither organization can be accurately described as "nimble".

In the end, it was resolved and the buyer received a complete refund of every penny paid and an email apology from me. Communications could have been better during the process, but there were extenuating circumstances that were, again, nobody else's business.

Due to the personal attacks, some that met the legal definition of libel, and rampant speculation of people who were leaping to conclusions with no first hand knowledge of the situation, the moderators locked the thread. Once they were satisfied that the matter had been resolved to everyone's satisfaction, they deleted the irrelevant responses, speculation and name calling.


I can see long and thoughtful comments posted by Kerry on this thread about following the rules. Ironic, isn't?

So, how is that ironic? Exactly what forum rule did I not follow? Or is the above statment just more ill informed speculation on your part?

Kerry

BrianShaw
1-Jun-2011, 16:59
Why do I have the impression that this thread is headed to "an undisclosed location?". Sad, I think it is sad. I've had very good experiences with the Classified forum and the members here. No complaints from me. No unsolicited advise either.

Kevin J. Kolosky
1-Jun-2011, 17:15
If I'm following this correctly, one should be able to go into a Toyota dealership showroom and give a long speech on how superior Fords are to Toyotas and not be removed from the showroom?


A toyota dealership is not a place that is meant for the exchange of ideas. It is meant as a place to sell Toyotas. Nevertheless, if I owned a Toyota Dealership and someone came in and gave along speech on how superior Fords are I wouldn't remove them from the showroom.

onnect17
1-Jun-2011, 18:02
The moderators are welcome to restore the thread then read my comments back them. I was one of the few defending Kerry and asking for members in the area to help, specially knowing how much you helped the LF community. Again, I'm sure a few members were waiting for some kind of clarification, specially potential buyers.

If you think is nobody's business what happen every time you sell some gear here, good luck selling the rest of the equipment.

onnect17
1-Jun-2011, 18:31
So, how is that ironic? Exactly what forum rule did I not follow? Or is the above statment just more ill informed speculation on your part?
Kerry

Kerry, It's not speculation. Sometimes we break the rules unknowingly.
If I remember correctly, a few month back you placed a link to a page in your website containing a list of lens for sale. Here's the original thread:
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=67723
Seems practical, I agree, but the price is not listed in the original post and according to the rules "The sales price must be clearly stated in the original post"

The reason is for the moderators have full control of the content of the forum (the way it should)
If I'm misunderstanding, please any moderator could make it clear for us.

urs0polar
1-Jun-2011, 18:59
Kerry, It's not speculation. Sometimes we break the rules unknowingly.
If I remember correctly, a few month back you placed a link to a page in your website containing a list of lens for sale. Seems practical, I agree, but the price is not listed in the original post. According to the rules:

"The sales price must be clearly stated in the original post"

The reason is for the moderators have full control of the content of the forum (the way it should)
If I'm misunderstanding, please any moderator could make it clear for us.

The price was listed in the link on his website, with one click, fully compliant with the "idea behind the rule", as it were (the idea being the price is listed with the lens in an easy to find way, rather than a lens posted as a "feeler" that the person doesn't really want to sell so he/she posts it and once they see what people offer, decide to keep it -- I think that's what was trying to be avoided). I know this because I bought the 360 Nikkor from Kerry, and his price was listed right there on the interwebs after I clicked once. I got it and it's awesome. I also bought a Jobo drum from him. Great prices, arrived as described, no problems. I'm glad everything turned out OK with that lost package and it's none of our business beyond that.

As for me, the classifieds work great; as someone else said, I learn a lot just from seeing people post lenses. I hate eBay, pretty much done with that place. That leaves, here, KEH, Igor's, and BH/Adorama (in the US at least). Not a whole lot of places. Please keep the classifieds!!! This talk is freaking us out! heh :-)

Kerry L. Thalmann
1-Jun-2011, 19:18
Kerry, It's not speculation. Sometimes we break the rules unknowingly.
If I remember correctly, a few month back you placed a link to a page in your website containing a list of lens for sale. Seems practical, I agree, but the price is not listed in the original post. According to the rules:

"The sales price must be clearly stated in the original post"

The reason is for the moderators have full control of the content of the forum (the way it should)
If I'm misunderstanding, please any moderator could make it clear for us.

So, that's your entire basis for accusing me of breaking the forum rules???? Seriously? There were only three specific items listed for sale in that thread and all had clearly listed prices in accordance with the forum rules. The remaining lenses were listed at the link I provided, complete with prices for every item as required.

Early in that thread, forum moderator Ken Lee wrote:


Note from moderator - Make sure that prices are listed if you add more posts on this thread.

We don't allow bidding, or pointers to bidding that takes place elsewhere on the web.

That aside, I'm dying to see the list. It will be a "Future Classic" :)

There was no bidding. Every item sold had clearly listed asking prices. On more that one occasion, I had potential buyers offer me more than my asking price for a lens that already had a full price offer. In all cases those "bids" were rejected and the lens sold to the first person who offered to buy it at the asking price.

Whether, or not the letter of the law was followed can be debated (I believe it was since every specific item listed in the thread had a clearly stated price), the spirit of the rule was certainly followed. Everything I offered for sale had a clearly stated price and no bidding was allowed or encouraged.

And ultimately, what does that have to do with:


Remember when the dozens of posts in the thread "Looking for Kerry Thalmann" suddenly disappeared?

I can see long and thoughtful comments posted by Kerry on this thread about following the rules. Ironic, isn't?

The listing for that sale clearly stated the prices of every item offered. No forum rules were broken.

You came here and badmouthed me and now seem to be fishing for something, anything, to justify that behavior.

The mods are always fee to delete any post I've made. It's their sandbox and I'm perfectly willing to play by their rules. If I run afoul of those rules, either intentionally, or by accident, I have no problem with them deleting my posts.

Kerry

Leigh
1-Jun-2011, 19:22
If I remember correctly, a few month back you placed a link to a page in your website containing a list of lens for sale. Here's the original thread:
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=67723
The first post in that thread mentioning the website (#16) goes to a page which does have prices, as it did when I viewed it originally.

Perhaps your memory is less than perfect.

- Leigh

onnect17
1-Jun-2011, 19:24
The price was listed in the link on his website, with one click, fully compliant with the "idea behind the rule", as it were (the idea being the price is listed with the lens in an easy to find way, rather than a lens posted as a "feeler" that the person doesn't really want to sell so he/she posts it and once they see what people offer, decide to keep it -- I think that's what was trying to be avoided). I know this because I bought the 360 Nikkor from Kerry, and his price was listed right there on the interwebs after I clicked once. I got it and it's awesome. I also bought a Jobo drum from him. Great prices, arrived as described, no problems. I'm glad everything turned out OK with that lost package and it's none of our business beyond that.

As for me, the classifieds work great; as someone else said, I learn a lot just from seeing people post lenses. I hate eBay, pretty much done with that place. That leaves, here, KEH, Igor's, and BH/Adorama (in the US at least). Not a whole lot of places. Please keep the classifieds!!! This talk is freaking us out! heh :-)

So, question for the moderators, just to be clear.
Are we allow according to the current rules in "Classifieds" to create a FS thread and instead of listing the prices in the opening post we will add a link later on to an external site with the prices? It could be very convenient.

Kevin J. Kolosky
1-Jun-2011, 19:27
WE wouldn't be having this discussion about who did and who didn't break the rules if there wasn't any rules to break!!

onnect17
1-Jun-2011, 19:45
...
You came here and badmouthed me and now seem to be fishing for something, anything, to justify that behavior.
...
Kerry

I'm not "badmouthing" anybody or fishing for anything. It was your lack of communication here in the forum when Susan was looking for you what created the space for some members to speculate (not me for sure). Here's a link to a genuinely concerned Susan:
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=69257

Since then I always wondered what was going on. Today, I got a better picture of what happened.

onnect17
1-Jun-2011, 19:51
...
Whether, or not the letter of the law was followed can be debated
...


That's exactly where I see the irony.

Sal Santamaura
1-Jun-2011, 20:05
...I understand your comments, but I respectfully disagree. The fact that this thread sat idle for seven and a half years, without any complaints about the classified section, speaks volumes for how well it works...This thread might have sat idle, but there have been a number of others in the interim that included both complaints about how the For Sale/Wanted category is structured and addressed problems with specific transactions.

I'm one of those who has happily purchased multiple items from you Kerry, first via eBay (before there was a For Sale/Wanted category here) and later through your ads on this forum. I remain convinced that the slightly higher prices I'd have needed to pay for things purchased here had they transacted through eBay -- to cover your fees -- would have been worthwhile in exchange for keeping the Large Format Photography Forum commerce-free.


WE wouldn't be having this discussion about who did and who didn't break the rules if there wasn't any rules to break!!Nor would we if the For Sale/Wanted category didn't exist.

Jim Ewins
1-Jun-2011, 20:18
A buy/sell would be great but this kind of thing requires a lot of maintenance. Bad deals or deals that go bad tend to go back to a moderator for resolution which is no fun.

From my observations of this forum, IMO there are too many that aren't adult enough to handle a disagreement.

Lachlan 717
1-Jun-2011, 20:25
I'm not "badmouthing" anybody or fishing for anything. It was your lack of communication here in the forum when Susan was looking for you what create the space for some members to speculate (not me for sure). Here's a link to a genuinely concerned Susan:
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=69257

Since then I always wondered what was going on. Today, I got a better picture of what happened.

Wow; your arrogance is amazing.

How dare you assume the right to expect Kerry to communicate so that you can satisfy your curiosity? How dare you assume that (what you perceive as) a lack of communication was a conscious act on Kerry's behalf? For what it's worth, if you had read the thread as it was unfolding, you would have discovered that there were mitigating circumstances. But truth and accuracy don't really seem to bother you.

Instead, you just shoot your mouth off here with smear and innuendo that paints a very, very helpful, honest, genuine supporter of photography as being, at best, negligent in his transactions.

Have you ever dealt directly with Kerry?

onnect17
1-Jun-2011, 21:11
Wow; your arrogance is amazing.

How dare you assume the right to expect Kerry to communicate so that you can satisfy your curiosity? How dare you assume that (what you perceive as) a lack of communication was a conscious act on Kerry's behalf? For what it's worth, if you had read the thread as it was unfolding, you would have discovered that there were mitigating circumstances. But truth and accuracy don't really seem to bother you.

Instead, you just shoot your mouth off here with smear and innuendo that paints a very, very helpful, honest, genuine supporter of photography as being, at best, negligent in his transactions.

Have you ever dealt directly with Kerry?

Somebody calling me arrogant! lol
Your words are making my case. When you lack substance in your argument then you start calling names, trying to get the moderators in the "delete" mode. I hope they do not fall for it this time.

When Susan started to get worried trying to locate Kerry after two months without communication the first thought (I’m sure other members had it too) was “ it could happen to me”.

Regarding any deal with Kerry, yes. I was ready to buy a lens from the 100 list when Susan’s post called my attention.
It’s up to each member to draw their own conclusions.

urs0polar
1-Jun-2011, 21:44
So, question for the moderators, just to be clear.
Are we allow according to the current rules in "Classifieds" to create a FS thread and instead of listing the prices in the opening post we will add a link later on to an external site with the prices? It could be very convenient.

uh, no.

Ken Lee wrote this, which Kerry quoted: "Note from moderator - Make sure that prices are listed if you add more posts on this thread." i.e. "It's not the end of the world but it's not the rules so add prices from now on". Pretty straightforward, if you ask me (which I'm not sure you do, but hey).

urs0polar
1-Jun-2011, 21:52
Strangely enough, this thread has given me a huge laugh as it reminded me of this (all in good fun!):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yTl9zYS3_dc&feature=fvst

Kerry L. Thalmann
1-Jun-2011, 22:06
That's exactly where I see the irony.

That's not irony. It's difference of opinion. There wasn't one item listed in that thread that didn't have a price clearly stated.

Where the gray area comes in is that I also posted a link to additional, non-specific items. That link contained a list of items, the condition and a clearly stated price for each item.

The forum rule states: "Auctions are not permitted. Links to other auction sites such as eBay or other points of sale are prohibited and will be deleted without notice."

There were no auctions, no links to eBay listings. That much is clear and without question. I have no idea what "other points of sale" means. I did not offer my lenses for sale anywhere else - just to the readers of this forum.

Again from Ken Lee's post on the first page of that thread:

[QUOTE=Ken Lee;638676]We don't allow bidding, or pointers to bidding that takes place elsewhere on the web.[quote]

Again, I did not allow, encourage or accept bidding on any of the items I offered for sale. No one paid more than my initial asking price for any item. A few people paid less, either when I lowered my asking price on items that didn't sell immediately, or when I accepted a lower offer for an item. Every item that was listed, in the thread and at the link had a clearly stated price. Anyone who saw what I was selling saw the price at the exact same time.

I still don't see how I broke any rules. Multiple moderators read and participated in that thread and none of my posts were deleted or edited. So, they must not have thought I broke any rules.

Since then, I have decided to list items individually, or in small groups of similar items, with full descriptions and the required asking prices (which I have always done). It's more work, but in the end, it gives potential buyers a better idea of what they are purchasing, and IMHO, an educated customer is likely to be a happy customer.

Kerry

Lachlan 717
1-Jun-2011, 22:09
Your words are making my case.

Given how badly you're doing it, it seemed that someone had to. Nature abhors a vacuum...

Kerry L. Thalmann
1-Jun-2011, 22:14
WE wouldn't be having this discussion about who did and who didn't break the rules if there wasn't any rules to break!!

And we wouldn't have a classifieds section if there weren't any rules. Sounds like a classic Catch-22. Although this thread may eventually grow to equal it in length, I doubt if it will ever be as highly regarded as Joseph Heller's classic novel.

Kerry

Kerry L. Thalmann
1-Jun-2011, 22:24
Regarding any deal with Kerry, yes. I was ready to buy a lens from the 100 list when Susan’s post called my attention.

I don't recall you ever contacting me directly about anything I've ever offered for sale. Perhaps you did and I just don't remember it.

In any case, all you have to do is click on my user name to send me a PM (that's PRIVATE message) or an email and I'd be happy to answer specific questions about anything I have listed in the classifieds section.

Kerry

Jim Becia
2-Jun-2011, 06:19
While Kerry is more than capable of "defending" himself, there isn't another person on this board that I trust more. I've purchased from Kerry numerous times. I've also met Kerry and hiked and shot with him. There is no one more giving of his time and knowledge when it come to LF. I once bought some film from him on a trip and I didn't have the funds for the film with me, he simply said send him a check when I get back (which was several weeks.)

Happy to see Kerry active again here on the forum. Jim Becia

Brian Ellis
2-Jun-2011, 07:58
No, it's in response to problems that result from mere existence of a classifieds category, Kevin's attitude/complaint being just one of many. I quoted Kirk simply to highlight the moderators' workload. Please read what I wrote in its entirety:

I didn't expect any more agreement now than when my position was unpopular before the category existed. However, since events in the interim seem to validate such opposition, it seemed worth repeating.

FWIW (nothing) I share your opinion. I think this was a better, more pleasant forum before the classifieds existed . I think the classifieds have drawn some people here whose principal interest is selling or buying gear rather than contributing anything of value to the forum. And oddly enough, they sometimes seem to be the people who complain the most about some aspect of the forum.

Of course it probably could also be argued that some people initially drawn here by the classifieds remain here and end up contributing. So it's hard to say but on balance I'd come down on the side of getting rid of the classifieds and going back to what the forum used to be, i.e. a pure discussion forum.

Brian Ellis
2-Jun-2011, 08:12
. . . As for me, the classifieds work great; as someone else said, I learn a lot just from seeing people post lenses. I hate eBay, pretty much done with that place. That leaves, here, KEH, Igor's, and BH/Adorama (in the US at least). Not a whole lot of places. Please keep the classifieds!!! This talk is freaking us out! heh
:-)

In the interest of accuracy, and not because I care that much one way or the other about the classifieds, there are other places on line devoted to sales of LF gear besides this forum. You aren't limited to ebay, KEH, Igor's, etc. Two places I've used that immediately come to mind are APUG and the LF section in the photo.net classifieds.

sanking
2-Jun-2011, 09:40
Although I don't buy and sell a lot on this forum I consider the classified section a valuable resource. If you take into account the hundreds of transactions that take place here without incident the overall impact on the forum is far more positive than negative.

And just for the record, I agree with the policy that requires that sellers put a price on their merchandise rather than ask for offers. I hope the moderators hold to this position and continue to insist that a selling price is included in all adds.

Sandy King

Kevin J. Kolosky
2-Jun-2011, 13:05
I respect your opinion, but would like to understand your logic behind your opinion.

Brian Ellis
2-Jun-2011, 13:09
Although I don't buy and sell a lot on this forum I consider the classified section a valuable resource. If you take into account the hundreds of transactions that take place here without incident the overall impact on the forum is far more positive than negative.

And just for the record, I agree with the policy that requires that sellers put a price on their merchandise rather than ask for offers. I hope the moderators hold to this position and continue to insist that a selling price is included in all adds.

Sandy King

I think what you mean to say is that in your opinion the overall impact on the forum is far more positive than negative. Not everyone shares your opinion. But if we must have the classified section I agree that a price should be required on each item rather than soliciting offers.

Kirk Gittings
2-Jun-2011, 13:14
I think what you mean to say is that in your opinion the overall impact on the forum is far more positive than negative. Not everyone shares your opinion. But if we must have the classified section I agree that a price should be required on each item rather than soliciting offers.

And yet Bryan.......you participate heavily in the For/Sale section, some 34 of the last 80 threads you have started were to sell items. You certainly take advantage of it.

Brian Ellis
2-Jun-2011, 13:58
And yet Bryan.......you participate heavily in the For/Sale section, some 34 of the last 80 threads you have started were to sell items. You certainly take advantage of it.

Actually Kirk almost all my recent listings - those within the last roughly year and a half - were made when I was selling a lot of photography equipment as a favor for a friend who inherited it from her father and had no idea how to dispose of it. But I've certainly sold some of my own equipment there too. I didn't realize that using the forum precluded one from thinking this would be a better place without it. Is that supposed to make me a hypocrite in your view? And if not, what's your point?

sanking
2-Jun-2011, 18:30
I respect your opinion, but would like to understand your logic behind your opinion.

It is kind of like this. If you ask for offers it opens up something of a bidding war.

If I sell a piece of photographic equipment to a friend who understand the value of photographic equipment I ask for what I consider a fair price. I don't want to get into a bidding war with my friend.

This is a community of people of like interests, or friends. If I want to get the most for my item, or pay the least, I will probably go to ebay.

Hope that explains my logic.

Sandy

Merg Ross
2-Jun-2011, 19:01
Although I have sold a few items here, what I really appreciate is the "want to buy" aspect. Within a matter of days or hours of posting, I have purchased items from members of this forum; items that I thought might be difficult to locate.

As an aside, my thanks to those who provide and moderate this forum. Change is always in the wind, but for the niche we share, this forum functions well and provides a great service. Thanks.

BrianShaw
2-Jun-2011, 19:02
I have a thought. I'll give it to the highest bidder. Bids start at a penny. The hidden reserve is two cents. Auction closes at an undisclosed time in the future. All sales are final and, please, paypal as "gift" only. Full value will be disclosed on customs declarations, if required. A small handling charge will be added to the actual shipping cost. Insurance is mandatory and will be paid by the buyer. Good luck!

Kevin J. Kolosky
3-Jun-2011, 14:20
It is kind of like this. If you ask for offers it opens up something of a bidding war.

If I sell a piece of photographic equipment to a friend who understand the value of photographic equipment I ask for what I consider a fair price. I don't want to get into a bidding war with my friend.

This is a community of people of like interests, or friends. If I want to get the most for my item, or pay the least, I will probably go to ebay.

Hope that explains my logic.

Sandy


Sandy

Great! Yes, this is a wonderful place for people of like interests and friends. And your logic is good.

Here is mine.

An item is worth what a given seller will sell it for and a given buyer will buy it for at any given time and neither party is required to buy or sell.

If a seller posts an asking price, the seller is completing one half of the requirement by posting the amount she will sell for. We still need the other side of the coin. The buyer must then advise if that is the amount she will buy for. And sometimes the buyer will agree with the seller and buy for the sellers price. Sometimes! But I think that it is ingrained in everyone (its part of the human condition) that if we are a buyer we are going to test that price with the seller. We are going to make sure that is what the seller wants to sell for because even though we might want the item it is ingrained in us that we don't want to pay too much for it, even if we are dealing with friends.

So we might look around a bit to see if that item is selling anywhere else so we can get an idea of what other people are valuing that item at, and then we might make a decision. We might decide we don't want the item afterall, or we decide we want the item at the offered price, or we decide to question that price and see if we can get that item for a lower price.

Based on my experiences in almost 60 years of living, unless one is in a retail setting, I would estimate that in about 7 of 10 times (or maybe more) a person is going to MAKE ON OFFER even if they are really willing to buy the item at the asking price. They do this because they cannot help it. They do it because they are human.

I watch Ebay very closely for many photography items. And I can say without a doubt that those folks who start with a lower price on their item and let people MAKE OFFERS (a bid is nothing more than an offer) will have much more success in selling their item than those who start out with a BUY IT NOW asking price. In fact, it sometimes amazes me that people will bid an item above the buy it now price of the same item on a different auction.

Making offers is a natural thing for humans to do. Its how commerce gets done, even between friends. I think it is a better way to determine value because there is only one seller, but many buyers.

And so, I do not see the real benefit in disallowing offers on "unpriced" items. Of course, there are those who say they its unfair if they make a bid and the seller accepts a higher bid. I think the question could also be asked if its fair to the seller to sell for a lower price when in fact there is someone who would pay a higher price!

Of course, there are those here who would see such a change as a deterioration of the Forum. They say it would ruin the forum. They say they can't stand it when somebody places an ad for something by offer without a price. And sometimes the tendency then is to attack that other person because the other person made them angry, or mad, or something else.

I think that a lot of people seem to forget that nobody makes anybody mad or sad or angry. There are no chords that connect peoples brains to each other. Rather, people allow theirselves to have certain emotions and allow theirselves to react in certain ways based on other peoples behavior.

To me, rather than allowing myself to get angry if I don't like a post, I try to allow myself to just move on to the next post. If somebody says they develop tri-x at 25 minutes at 65 degrees and get great prints on Oriental Seagull past dated paper with Neutal W developer and I don't agree I either don't read any further, or if I wish to comment, I try to comment on the objective statement rather than the person who made it.

No matter what the rules, there will always be those who seem to feel the need to advance ad hominum arguments. They don't like what is being said, but they cannot for one reason or another formulate an argument about what is being said, so they instead attack the person who is advancing the argument. They somehow think that if they embarrass the other person by calling them names, or attack their intelligence, or attack their experience, or attack their education, or their race, or their station in life, they have won the objective argument. Or they will advance custom, tradition, feelings, instinct, hunch, intuition, majority rule, ownership, consensus, or other arguments to prove a truth.

In the end, I will have to admit that maybe my frustration isn't so much with the rule as it is the need to have rules at all. Here, the "ownership" argument works. But behind the scenes I bet there are one hell of a lot of offers being advanced and accepted.

Leigh
3-Jun-2011, 20:23
I watch Ebay very closely for many photography items. And I can say without a doubt that those folks who start with a lower price on their item and let people MAKE OFFERS (a bid is nothing more than an offer) will have much more success in selling their item than those who start out with a BUY IT NOW asking price.
Ebay is an auction site. One expects to make bids on auctions.

LFPF is not an auction site. Permitting ads that solicit offers without stated prices turns it into an auction site.

Permitting such action attracts sellers who are too cheap to use real auction sites and pay for the privilege.

But there's a further problem. With no online bidding visible to all, using only PM or email to convey offers, there's nothing to keep sellers honest. I could offer to buy something for $55, and the seller could say he has an offer for $70. How do I know whether that's true or not? It invites dishonesty.

Sellers are obliged to state a price and accept an offer to buy at that price. They're not obliged to sell at a lower price.

I'm a moderator on another very active board, much larger than LFPF, and we have the same rules there. It just keeps everything clean.

- Leigh

urs0polar
3-Jun-2011, 22:17
HI Kevin,

I agree with the motive behind your position, but I have a different view, which I feel is more practical, and I will explain why:

My 2 cents is that I have seen it where people say to themselves something like "what do you think I can get for this?", they list their item in the for sale section, people PM them offers, and then they decide they don't want to sell it after all as it seems to be "worth something" or "no one is serious" or some other excuse. I've seen that kind of thing happen here in the past (or at least it strongly appeared that way). The "set a price" rule seemed to fix that.

On the other hand, setting a price yourself that you are willing to accept (or be negotiated down from) psychologically prepares you to actually sell the item. If someone meets your price or is "serious" and offers you close to your asking, it is a much more powerful incentive to actually sell it than if you decide to hold out and hold out for more money. You say to yourself "Well, I needed to get rid of it, and fair is fair, so off it goes". At least this sort of thing has forced me to finally part with something when someone gives a respectful offer that's in the ballpark.

Nobody's mentioned this yet, but the reason the auction site works with bids and this classifeds wouldn't is that the bids are *timed*, in that they end at a certain time without the seller being able to extend it for more time if the reserve is met.

It is just as insulting for a "serious" bidder who bids what would be generally considered a "fair/good" offer for something to just have to wait and wait with no end in sight unless the seller gets bored and accepts the offer randomly. The only way to get over that is to *significantly* overbid so that the seller would be an idiot not to accept on the spot.

That's not fair either. If I have to overbid to ensure I get it, then I'm better off going to an auction site in the first place or paying the premium and buying it from a dealer with a return policy and an established reputation for taking returns if it should not work out.

So, without implementing an entire auction system here at LFPF, I think the way it is now is the best compromise. This way, the moderators won't have to deal with enforcing a selling timeline or managing reserves or some other craziness. I mean, look at how many rules eBay has -- especially, (paraphrasing) "if someone has bid at or over your reserve at the close of the auction, then you MUST sell the item". Then eBay has a bunch of incompetents on the phone so you can both learn together what the rules mean as they pertain to a particular situation.

I'm with you on the no rules thing from a simplistic "principles" perspective (Ayn Rand is my hero), but I think this has to be both rational and easy for the moderators as opening it up completely means that someone has to police it when it goes wrong.

The way they have it now is awesomely simple: you post your price, if someone offers you your price and you refuse, they either move on or mention it in the comments; enough of those and no one buys from you. No moderator needed.

Again, my 2 cents.

Kevin J. Kolosky
4-Jun-2011, 08:21
Gentleman

Both of you speak of dishonesty. And I certainly respect honesty and know what dishonesty is for I have done considerable work for people and never got paid and I have sent items to people and never got paid. I don't want to turn this post into a religious post, but since I am Christian I have learned to say Father please forgive them for they know not what they do, and then I move on.

But with regard to honesty in buying and selling. I think a seller has the right to sell her item for whatever price she wants to sell it for. And I think that a buyer has the right to buy an item for whatever price she wants to buy it for. Where I differ is that I see no dishonesty in either one of those folks changing their minds up until money and the item actually change hands.

So, for example, if I have an item and I invite an offer and somebody offers me $55.00 and I tell them I have an offer for $70 even though I don't have an offer for $70 I do not see that as dishonest to the buyer (even though I do see it as a lie) becasue once again, the buyer has the right to buy an item for whatever price she wants to buy the item, or completely disregard the item. If she doesn't want to buy the item at $70 all she has to do is say so and move on. She has not been hurt because she is in the exact same position as she was before she considered the item. And if she bought the item she has not been hurt either because by buying the item she signifies that she was willing to pay that price for that item.

In addition, here, on this forum, nothing can go wrong that would need moderator intervention. The reason moderator intervention would not be needed is becaue "THE RULES" clearly state that using the classifieds is at one's own risk. Thus, the "management" of this board has basically relieved theirselves of any responsibility for anything that can go wrong. And I agree with them wholeheartedly in that position. Too many people rely on government (and board moderators) to do everything for them from cradle to grave. Therefore, as I have stated, if every transaction on the classifieds board is totally at the risk of those who use it, then why need any rule whatsoever?

As I said, I am fine with the rule. No problem. I can easily do what I profess, which is to accept it for what it is and just not sell here, without any bitterness. I just don't see the logic in it.

Have a happy day.

K

P. S. I have gone back and looked at a few of the WTB posts on the classifieds. Rarely, if ever, was there a price listed on those. Yet, they were not "removed" for lack of posting a price. Is it not the same thing in reverse?

BrianShaw
4-Jun-2011, 09:40
My 2 cents

(snip)

Again, my 2 cents.

So... is that a bid on my auction?. Do I put you down for a 2 cent bid, or 4? I can't tell if you were upping your own bid or just repeating it for clarity. :D

urs0polar
4-Jun-2011, 09:45
So... is that a bid on my auction. Do I put you down for a 2 cent bid, or 4? I can't tell if you were upping your own bid or just repeating it for clairty. :D

haha ok I'm game.... whatever LF thing you have for 4 cents, I'll buy. Free shipping right? :P

BrianShaw
4-Jun-2011, 09:59
haha ok I'm game.... whatever LF thing you have for 4 cents, I'll buy. Free shipping right? :P

Not a "thing", but a "thought". Please refer to my offer posting.

I've been biting my tongue so much as I read this thread that I feel i should be compensated for the time I've spent reading the various posts. One of the most recent posts has had me pondering the reversals of logic/ethics and has me so confused that I had to raise the reserve to get a decent return on my investment.

Thanks for your bid... but there is also "somebody" who has "offered" me "more"... say, "lots more"... so you'd better "up your bid" unless you want this "phantom" to "win" the "auction". "She" really, really, really wants to "pay" a lot for my item. "No lie", "really"! :rolleyes:

BrianShaw
4-Jun-2011, 10:00
p.s. Could you use a Deardorff board that once had a big flange attached to it?

Kevin J. Kolosky
4-Jun-2011, 10:39
Not a "thing", but a "thought". Please refer to my offer posting.

I've been biting my tongue so much as I read this thread"

Careful, you don't want to hurt yourself

Thanks for your bid... but there is also "somebody" who has "offered" me "more"... say, "lots more"... so you'd better "up your bid" unless you want this "phantom" to "win" the "auction". "She" really, really, really wants to "pay" a lot for my item. "No lie", "really"! :rolleyes:

I see this as no different than withdrawing the item from sale or withdrawng the item from the sale and reposting it later at a higher price. Once again, the buyer has the right to withdraw from the sale if they do not like the higher price, and the seller has no duty to sell at any price until a contract has been formed. There are no damages.
The seller was in the same place as she was if she didn't buy, and if she did buy then she wasn't hurt either becasue she got was she wanted at a price she was willing to pay. A true value for the item was found, e.g. a value at which the seller was willing to sell, and a value at which the buyer was willing to buy.

It is really no different than if one places an ad for an item, say for $1000, and the prospective buyer sends an email saying "I know where I can get one of these for cheaper but yours looks nice so I will offer $800".

Same thing. The seller doesn't have to take the offer, and therefore there are no damages. And if the seller does take the offer, then he was willing to accept less in the first place. A true value was found, e.g. where the seller wanted to sell, and where the buyer wanted to buy.

Leigh
4-Jun-2011, 11:10
... if I have an item and I invite an offer and somebody offers me $55.00 and I tell them I have an offer for $70 even though I don't have an offer for $70 I do not see that as dishonest to the buyer (even though I do see it as a lie)...
So apparently lying is perfectly OK in your world.

Not in mine. :eek:

A lie is a lie, and the person saying it is a liar.


- Leigh

BrianShaw
4-Jun-2011, 11:27
Kevin... are you a lawyer? You write and seem to think like one.

My understanding of damages related to sales is same as yours. Until a contract is formed, there are no damages. That, however, does not justify - in the ethical sense of the word - false offering or the telling of falsehoods to achieve a sales contract.

"A lie is a lie, and the person saying it is a liar." copyright 2011 Leigh. Used without express permission but believed allowable under the Fair Use clause of the US Copyright law.

Ken Lee
4-Jun-2011, 11:28
Members have always been free to contact sellers off-line - where such conversations add no further clutter to the site.

Forum moderators, as volunteers, appreciate not having to monitor auctions and resolve disputes. Even without auctions, there are occasional disputes.

For on-line auctions, feel free to visit eBay.

Leigh
4-Jun-2011, 11:36
"A lie is a lie, and the person saying it is a liar." copyright 2011 Leigh. Used without express permission but believed allowable under the Fair Use clause of the US Copyright law.
Permission granted for personal non-commercial use with no compensation required. ;)

- Leigh (copyright holder)

Kevin J. Kolosky
4-Jun-2011, 11:58
Leigh

No, I do not condone lying.

But until a contract is actually formed in which there has been a manifestation of mutual assent to sell and buy a certain item at a certain price and there has been some consideration given I just don't see raising the price of an item to adjust for the demand of the item as being incorrect.

How is a seller to determine what the true value of her item is? There is only one way, and that is to find a buyer who is willing to buy the item at a price. How does the seller determine the price. Two ways. Either ask buyers to provide her with prices, or, put a price, have someone offer to buy at that price, and then see if there are others who would pay more than that first buyer. Otherwise, the value is only a guess!!!!

And the ultimate goal in any deal is for the transaction to take place at fair market value.
You cannot know that until you have tested the market.


What is "clutter"? Is clutter to one person clutter to all persons? Is advertizing a book clutter? Is selling an item without an adequate description of the item clutter? Is asking more than the item is worth clutter? What is clutter?

BrianShaw
4-Jun-2011, 12:05
Why omit a third way of determinine value, appraisal based on prior sales history? While that may not be "true" value, it is a customary method for most people get close to a credible approximation of true value.

Kevin J. Kolosky
4-Jun-2011, 12:10
Is it fair for a store to sell an item to a customer for one price, and then later sell that same item to another customer for a lower price?

Leigh
4-Jun-2011, 12:12
No, I do not condone lying.
Yes, apparently you do, based on your earlier comments.

As to your nonsense rants about "fair value", it's up to the seller to determine that before he puts the item up for sale. That's the business model of every retail store you enter.

I believe you do understand the difference between an auction and a sale, but choose to ignore it because you can't counter the arguements made previously.

Tell you what... Why don't you put your money where your mouth is?
You put up a forum site like LFPF, with a For Sale section having no rules, and we'll come visit.

If you're unwilling to do that, your comments aren't worth the electrons they're written with.

- Leigh

Leigh
4-Jun-2011, 12:13
Is it fair for a store to sell an item to a customer for one price, and then later sell that same item to another customer for a lower price?
Of course. It's done all the time.

It's called a Sale. "10% off", "$2 off", "buy one get one free", whatever.

And folks who bought the item at the higher price can't go in for a refund of the difference.

- Leigh

BrianShaw
4-Jun-2011, 12:13
Kevin... are you a lawyer?

I got my answer. Good luck on your next campaign. If I ever get in trouble in your area I definitely will call on you for professional services. You could probably successfully argue the devil into heaven.

BrianShaw
4-Jun-2011, 12:16
"your comments aren't worth the electrons they're written with."

May I also please have permission to use this for personal non-commercial use with no compensation required?

Leigh
4-Jun-2011, 12:19
"your comments aren't worth the electrons they're written with."

May I also please have permission to use this for personal non-commercial use with no compensation required?
Absolutely yes. Permission granted (for personal non-commercial use), gratis. :rolleyes:

And I also have better things to do. This is such an obvious troll, it's a total waste of time, but no more of mine.

- Leigh

Kevin J. Kolosky
4-Jun-2011, 12:38
Yes, apparently you do, based on your earlier comments.

"As to your nonsense rants about "fair value",


If you're unwilling to do that, your comments aren't worth the electrons they're written with.

Argumentum Ad Hominem
- Leigh

Kevin J. Kolosky
4-Jun-2011, 12:43
Absolutely yes. Permission granted (for personal non-commercial use), gratis. :rolleyes:

And I also have better things to do. This is such an obvious troll, it's a total waste of time, but no more of mine.



- Leigh

Because YOU have better things to do this is an obvious troll.

Fallacy of Irrelevant Evidence

sanking
4-Jun-2011, 12:52
Kevin,

How complicated can this be? You know the rules of the forum, and from the discussion most of us appear to approve of them, and have offered our logic as to why. If you don't like the rules just go sell your item somewhere else.

Sandy King

Kevin J. Kolosky
4-Jun-2011, 13:02
Today at 15:21

"As I said, I am fine with the rule. No problem. I can easily do what I profess, which is to accept it for what it is and just not sell here, without any bitterness. I just don't see the logic in it.

Have a happy day.

K"

urs0polar
4-Jun-2011, 14:48
Not a "thing", but a "thought". Please refer to my offer posting.

I've been biting my tongue so much as I read this thread that I feel i should be compensated for the time I've spent reading the various posts. One of the most recent posts has had me pondering the reversals of logic/ethics and has me so confused that I had to raise the reserve to get a decent return on my investment.

Thanks for your bid... but there is also "somebody" who has "offered" me "more"... say, "lots more"... so you'd better "up your bid" unless you want this "phantom" to "win" the "auction". "She" really, really, really wants to "pay" a lot for my item. "No lie", "really"! :rolleyes:

Geesus, I had to go back and look this up, like an open book test. I had missed your earlier post and I seriously thought you were just trying to lighten up the thread by pointing out I said "my 2 cents" twice, which I am all for. Oh well. I didn't know I was offerring to pay for your waste of your own leisure time. I retract my offer as I have gotten nothing for it. Beyond all that, I was addressing Kevin. Now I got you rolling your eyes at me... or something. Yay trolls!

I'm just trying to put my vote in to keep the classifieds the way they are as I find them useful, and I just want the moderators to know that I'm another user who likes them. Thanks everyone.

BrianShaw
4-Jun-2011, 14:55
I was trying to lighten it up. Sorry to have "used" you but your 2 cents comment(s) were simply irresistable. My comments are likely worth much less! I, too, like the Classifieds" and this forum just the way they are.

urs0polar
4-Jun-2011, 15:04
I was trying to lighten it up. Sorry to have "used" you but your 2 cents comment(s) were simply irresistable. My comments are likely worth much less! I, too, like the Classifieds" and this forum just the way they are.

:) Awesome, sorry I was so confused. Cool, see you around Le Forum.

Don7x17
7-Jun-2011, 11:17
While Kerry is more than capable of "defending" himself, there isn't another person on this board that I trust more. I've purchased from Kerry numerous times. I've also met Kerry and hiked and shot with him. There is no one more giving of his time and knowledge when it come to LF. I once bought some film from him on a trip and I didn't have the funds for the film with me, he simply said send him a check when I get back (which was several weeks.)

Happy to see Kerry active again here on the forum. Jim Becia

I couldn't agree with you more, Jim

I know Kerry Thallman professionally for over a decade - he formerly worked at the large microprocessor company that I work at, and now works in a similar role in another well-known chip company.

He's also highly regarded for his honesty in the Portland Oregon photographic community (which is quite extensive).

I've bought several photographic items from him and found him to be extremely forthright about any issues that an item has. Impeccably honest.

So if you(you know who you are, and its not Jim) are hiding behind an anonymous account name, and taking snipes at Kerry, you are indeed a fool.

Don Nelson

onnect17
8-Jun-2011, 07:14
Don,

My name is Armando Vergara, currently living in Newton, MA (Boston area) and please, check your profile, it's emptier than mine.

No need to take shots in anybody, just pointing out how sometimes communication is the key. I also tried to buy a lens from Kerry back in November (exchanged a couple of emails, Nov 2 and Nov 7, 2010). By the time I got an answer I already spent the money in other lens. Three months later the lens was still listed in the website and I was ready to buy it when Susan posts called my attention.

I wish the old thread could be restored. Where the extensive Portland Oregon photographic community was when I called for anybody in the area to invite him for a beer and check on his well-being?

Armando

Don7x17
8-Jun-2011, 11:04
Don,

My name is Armando Vergara, currently living in Newton, MA (Boston area) and please, check your profile, it's emptier than mine.

No need to take shots in anybody, just pointing out how sometimes communication is the key. I also tried to buy a lens from Kerry back in November (exchanged a couple of emails, Nov 2 and Nov 7, 2010). By the time I got an answer I already spent the money in other lens. Three months later the lens was still listed in the website and I was ready to buy it when Susan posts called my attention.

I wish the old thread could be restored. Where the extensive Portland Oregon photographic community was when I called for anybody in the area to invite him for a beer and check on his well-being?

Armando

PM sent. Lets take the issue offline from this point.

Also, thanks for noticing the profile. I wrote some of the original large lens material for Q.T. to post on the website, long before the forum existed (~1992 while I was in Arizona). When I found out about the forum and joined in 2008, I never filled in the profile- so its been updated!