PROBATION DISCUSSIONS

21 21

You are ignoring this ^ user

How many PM's should you have before you break the internet?

How many PM's should you have before you break the internet?

I still have 1,681 PMs dating back to 2008 and it ain't broke yet!

It's great that the PL system is in place to handle these types of issues and maybe I'm wrong but if I am taking an action like submitting someone to the PL then I have an idea on how I would like to have the issue resolved. :shrug:

 

If I'm the offended one, why wouldnt I already have an idea on how I could be made whole?

 

I understand what you're saying: while the PL serves as a warning, the primary objective of the PL is to get problem transactions completed.

 

Thus, when an offended party proposes a nomination, it's not simply to "get back at someone" but serve as an incentive to get the deal done.

 

So yes, the offended party should have at least a general idea of what would be needed to get the transaction satisfactorily completed.

 

However, there have been some problem transactions were the way forward is not readily clear. Initially, this looked like it could have been one of those transactions - buyer wants the book, seller sold the book and no longer has it.

 

In such cases, I would think the burden of finding a way to move forward would fall on the offender, not the offended.

 

 

This is why I was nominated.

 

No.

 

You were nominated because you unilaterally broke a deal which had terms that you and the buyer had both agreed upon.

 

So you feel absolutely no responsibility whatsoever to try and make things right with the buyer?

 

I told him I didn't mail the book yet and I would sell it to him, he declined.

 

And why did he decline?

 

He clearly said why: because selling the book to him now would involve doing to someone else what you were going to do to him.

 

What you've done with this transaction is put yourself in the unenviable position of having two buyers who have equal legitimate claim to the same book.

 

If you pull the book back and sell it to the first buyer, you're breaking your agreement with the second buyer.

 

If you go ahead with your deal with the second buyer, you're breaking your agreement with the first buyer.

 

You've claimed that the second buyer would be understanding if you couldn't fulfill your commitment to him. But you also assumed that the first buyer would be understanding about breaking your deal with him - without discussing it with him first. As it turns out, he wasn't. Are you sure your second buyer will be understanding, especially if you haven't discussed it with him yet? And even if he is, should he have to be? He didn't create this situation, you did.

 

Here's a suggestion:

 

In one of your snarky, dismissive responses you mentioned that there are several of these on eBay.

 

Why not buy one of those copies and send it to one of your buyers? That way you can fulfill your commitments to both of your buyers.

 

Of course, you won't make in money on the deal. You might even loose some. But you can chalk that up to a learning experience: don't agree to extended payment terms when what you really need is immediate payment and don't break or alter an agreement without discussing it with the other party first.

 

That's just a suggestion. And since it sounds like the first buyer is dropping the nomination, there's nothing in terms of the Probation process obligating you to come up with a solution.

 

It depends on how much your reputation as a seller on these boards is worth to you.

+1000

-slym

I don't think he's going to get it.

 

He PMed me last night for advice and my thoughts since I asked him and the nominator to remove their comments from the Probation List thread. I tried explaining that he unilaterally cancelled a deal in which he agreed to the conditions without any notice. I advised that he should work out something privately with the buyer and avoid this because he won't end up looking good in the end.

 

He responded with "Thanks for your time" and

 

"Gem_Mint has removed themself from this topic."

 

 

I don't get the drama around someone deleting a PM. The software makes it sound like a personal affront by saying "removed themselves from this topic."

 

I remember when I decided to start cleaning upt my PM inbox and got back some PMs from people asking if I was mad with them because I had "removed myself". They are just words from a probably socially inept programmer.

 

..... same thing here.....it could be worded better. I thought I had been put on ignore or something. GOD BLESS....

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus) (thumbs u

 

They should have used something like "PovertyRow has, in the interest of data storage conservation, reluctantly deleted this PM but wishes to express his deep appreciation for the attention you have shown him."

It's great that the PL system is in place to handle these types of issues and maybe I'm wrong but if I am taking an action like submitting someone to the PL then I have an idea on how I would like to have the issue resolved. :shrug:

 

If I'm the offended one, why wouldnt I already have an idea on how I could be made whole?

 

I understand what you're saying: while the PL serves as a warning, the primary objective of the PL is to get problem transactions completed.

 

Thus, when an offended party proposes a nomination, it's not simply to "get back at someone" but serve as an incentive to get the deal done.

 

So yes, the offended party should have at least a general idea of what would be needed to get the transaction satisfactorily completed.

 

However, there have been some problem transactions were the way forward is not readily clear. Initially, this looked like it could have been one of those transactions - buyer wants the book, seller sold the book and no longer has it.

 

In such cases, I would think the burden of finding a way to move forward would fall on the offender, not the offended.

 

 

This is why I was nominated.

 

No.

 

You were nominated because you unilaterally broke a deal which had terms that you and the buyer had both agreed upon.

 

So you feel absolutely no responsibility whatsoever to try and make things right with the buyer?

 

I told him I didn't mail the book yet and I would sell it to him, he declined.

 

And why did he decline?

 

He clearly said why: because selling the book to him now would involve doing to someone else what you were going to do to him.

 

What you've done with this transaction is put yourself in the unenviable position of having two buyers who have equal legitimate claim to the same book.

 

If you pull the book back and sell it to the first buyer, you're breaking your agreement with the second buyer.

 

If you go ahead with your deal with the second buyer, you're breaking your agreement with the first buyer.

 

You've claimed that the second buyer would be understanding if you couldn't fulfill your commitment to him. But you also assumed that the first buyer would be understanding about breaking your deal with him - without discussing it with him first. As it turns out, he wasn't. Are you sure your second buyer will be understanding, especially if you haven't discussed it with him yet? And even if he is, should he have to be? He didn't create this situation, you did.

 

Here's a suggestion:

 

In one of your snarky, dismissive responses you mentioned that there are several of these on eBay.

 

Why not buy one of those copies and send it to one of your buyers? That way you can fulfill your commitments to both of your buyers.

 

Of course, you won't make in money on the deal. You might even loose some. But you can chalk that up to a learning experience: don't agree to extended payment terms when what you really need is immediate payment and don't break or alter an agreement without discussing it with the other party first.

 

That's just a suggestion. And since it sounds like the first buyer is dropping the nomination, there's nothing in terms of the Probation process obligating you to come up with a solution.

 

It depends on how much your reputation as a seller on these boards is worth to you.

 

+1000

 

 

 

-slym

Ad not only that: I would add it depends on how much you are interested to be honest, which is way more important than a reputation which people may perceive.

Gem_Mint,

 

I've written some constructive critizism below. It's not intended as a pile-on, more like a wake-up call. Feel free to read it or ignore it, but know that you have work to do.

 

 

You are going about this completely incorrectly. Your sales practices don't make good business sense and you're coming off as very immature in this thread.

 

It's been said before and I'll say it again...communication is KEY! Like someone else posted, you should have contacted the original buyer before selling to a second buyer. Before it even got to that point, if it seems like an extended period of time to pay is going to put you in a tight spot, either don't agree to it or take a non-refundable deposit. All options are much better than what you did. I hope you take some time to reflect that you're not innocent in this matter.

 

I'll give you another example. I bought a few books from you earlier this year and they had been damaged due to improper packaging. I pointed it out to you and you just apologized and stated that you packed like that all the time. A great seller would have asked for pictures as a learning tool, offered a partial refund to compensate for the damage, offered an incentive on a future sale, offered and exchange, sent out a freebie, or any number of things to make the buyer feel like he didn't just get hosed. In our case, what you did wasn't terrible, but it wasn't great either.

 

I hope you don't take this as just bashing you; instead, take this as the constructive criticizism it's meant to be. As a seller, you're in the "below average" to "average" range and you can easily change that. Lose the attitude, be open to suggestions, and treat your word like it has value. If you tell someone you are going to sell something to them, follow through. It's not different than buying something and not paying.

 

Thanks for your input.

 

Ever since our deal, I have doubled up the amount of cardboard used for 1-3 books.

 

So i have learned from that experience.

 

I run an Instagram page with 3k followers. I buy and sell ALL the time. I average about 5 sales a day. Deals fall through ALL the time too.

 

I can see where I treated this more like Instagram than the forum which tends to be much more strict.

 

I won't make that mistake again.

 

I take responsibility. I agreed to the deal and I backed out. I should have never agreed to hold a book for that long and I won't be doing that again.

So it's ok to do this on IG but not here because of the higher standards? What's your IG handle?

I think Peter Palmer criticism was honest and very constructive. (thumbs u

How many PM's should you have before you break the internet?

 

I still have 1,681 PMs dating back to 2008 and it ain't broke yet!

How many PM's should you have before you break the internet?

 

I still have 1,681 PMs dating back to 2008 and it ain't broke yet!

2420 here. It's too bad the rest got erased after the big "switch".

I have 6823, you can have up to 30,000. I kept every one from every charity thread, . I would have deleted a couple, but I don't like the message that posts and the fact that it bumps the thread to tell you someone's removed themselves. So I just leave them there.

Too bad we don't have a better search system so I could take one person's name at a time, just keep the latest ones and send one note when I delete the old ones.

A search feature for PM's would be great. At least they are threaded now. In the old days, you got a separate PM for each reply.

I have 6823, you can have up to 30,000. I kept every one from every charity thread, . I would have deleted a couple, but I don't like the message that posts and the fact that it bumps the thread to tell you someone's removed themselves. So I just leave them there.

 

Too bad we don't have a better search system so I could take one person's name at a time, just keep the latest ones and send one note when I delete the old ones.

I keep almost all myself – I generally delete these which are "temporary" and do not contain communication or information useful to keep. But I see they can quickly become unpractical to handle, so I understand those which delete most of them…

Don’t like the message too… Maybe we could ask the mods to change it?

A search feature for PM's would be great. At least they are threaded now. In the old days, you got a separate PM for each reply.

You can do control F, but it's page by page

A search feature for PM's would be great. At least they are threaded now. In the old days, you got a separate PM for each reply.

If you save the threads in PDF format, at least on the Mac, you can search the files content, so it becomes a sort of equivalent, "offline" search, but I am too lazy to do so for all the threads…

This is probation discussion people, let's stop standing around measuring our

PM threads.

But the witch hunt continues

 

It's not a witch hunt. You just keep deflecting from the fact that you did something w rong and trying to blame the other guy (at least partially) for being part of the problem.

 

It's really simple, you messed up. Nobody else did.

This.

The jedi mind trick happens so frequently on these boards that it is has become an art form.

Thanks to those who took the time to chime in on my previous experience. Means a lot.

I did find another member on here in the sales thread (whom I've worked a deal with already) who was selling the same exact comic in the same grade for the same price. What a coincidence I guess.

Sorry I brought my situation out in the open like I did. I felt betrayed and upset. Lessons learned I guess.

Thanks again everyone.

I have never removed myself from a PM and I have every PM since I joined in '07...

I have never removed myself from a PM and I have every PM since I joined in '07...

 

 

Me too. (thumbs u

I have never removed myself from a PM and I have every PM since I joined in '07...

 

 

Only seems fair that everyone who's ever had a pm discussion with Tom should bump the pm