The new 'No Ad-Spoiling' Rule

Home Forum Chat Forum The new 'No Ad-Spoiling' Rule

Viewing 16 posts - 81 through 96 (of 96 total)
  • The new 'No Ad-Spoiling' Rule
  • nick1962
    Member

    Surely we should just scour the classifieds and report all the suspected traders ,fraudsters and people not complying with the spirit of the forum as per the rules.That should keep the Mods more than busy enough.

    nealglover
    Member

    Who cares about a poll, its their forum. They can do what they like.

    He he, brilliant.

    Someone who agrees with the decision doesn’t want a poll that might change it.

    What a shocker.

    toys19
    Member

    Sputnik go and register on rad bmx and look for my for sale on a set of profile cranks. Of which there are umpteen variations some cheap some not. And some twonk posted a link to some common cheap ones when mine were rare ltd edition.

    Neaelglover I thinkyou were away the day they did reading. Its their forum therefore a poll will change nothing.Do you notsee the logic fail in your statement?

    nick1962
    Member

    but you shouldn’t ban folk for telling the truth.

    Naive very naive…

    nick1962
    Member

    When someone points out that they can buy X for £1 cheaper online, which camp does that fall into?

    And with a warranty.

    Premier Icon timidwheeler
    Subscriber

    I don’t see your problem Toys. Just as with the snow chains post above, all you need to do is explain why the post is incorrect. I would not be put off.

    toys19
    Member

    Timidwheeler. I don’t care, Mark sees it as a problem, its his forum, looks like its going my way.l read the snowchains post, and whilst the seller obviously lost his rag, he was correct. Its like trying to sell a carbon fs 29er and someone pointing out that halfords do a fs bike for 179 delivered.

    jota180
    Member

    The specific ‘no ad spoiling’ rule is unnecessary IMO
    The current rules already cover it enough

    All it’s done is give possible scammers another bit of protection by gagging peer criticism.
    The official input on here when genuine scams have been uncovered is often remarkable only by it’s absence.

    toys19
    Member

    Jota189, thats frankly twaddle, they banned a bloke the other day who I wasnt even convinced was a scammer,just crap seller. Looks proactive to me.

    sputnik
    Member

    Coleman, I see your reason to be miffed with the spoiler on your thread. For starters he was talking about a totally different product of lower quality and your product was offered at a very reasonable price compared to what you paid for them. The spoiler should be reported by you and rapped on the knuckles. But i think anyone reading your FS add could have seen that and would not think you were over pricing. It was like saying Halfords have a bike for £80 and therefore the £1000 you are asking for your Ibis Mojo is too much 🙂

    Toys mate, you are taking it too serious! I was just curious to see how your sale was spoiled. Couldn’t find it and had to ask. Can’t be bothered with scouring the net for an example. And I am no white knight, cant remember ever intervening in a FS add with a “that is cheaper over there”.

    Dickyboy
    Member

    How’s about a limit on the number of classified posts per user per month? Would hopefully put off some traders & pointless reposting of overpriced tat, would also slow down the time taken for ads to drop off the front page?

    I’m guessing that stw towers are only interested in the page hit rate though 🙁

    nealglover
    Member

    they banned a bloke the other day who I wasnt even convinced was a scammer,just crap seller. Looks proactive to me.

    Who was that then ?

    toys19
    Member

    Sputnik no worries, apologies, I thought you were accusing me of embellishment…

    Coleman
    Member

    Sputnik – Thanks for your words of support. Not really miffed any more, just think it’s a bit sad some people feel the need to interfere in this manner.

    Premier Icon funkrodent
    Subscriber

    Blimey, that’s opened a can of worms! Never sold on here but have bought quite a few things. Should be pointed out that I’ve yet to have a bad experience. That said I always look at user history before buying. When I saw the initiative from Mark, I thought “great”. I’ve seen a few ads where somebody has commented in a way that seems to trash any chance of the seller making a sale, seemed a bit off to me. That said, I can also understand the community aspect of what people are saying. I suppose the bottom line is at what point do a group of people decide that they are the self-appointed arbiters of all that is right and proper? I understand (and fully support) action if a particular seller is trading, or spamming or scamming, but if someone has priced an article too high that’s ultimately between them and the potential purchaser. If you see someone you know expressing interest, email them. If you think the seller needs re-educating, email them. If they haven’t put their email in their account, tough. Most of the “interventions” I’ve seen, whether well meaning or not, have been crass and out of place and remind me of little more than the type of old woman who just can’t stop herself from twitching those curtains…

    Junkyard
    Member

    I suppose the bottom line is at what point do a group of people decide that they are the self-appointed arbiters of all that is right and proper?

    iirc its when you have the moniker moderator next to your log in name 😉

Viewing 16 posts - 81 through 96 (of 96 total)

The topic ‘The new 'No Ad-Spoiling' Rule’ is closed to new replies.