BST consolidation issues, question?

[T206Collector]

Don't blame your fading position on the B/S/T for why your item isn't selling. Check your asking price and the market interest in your item.

[Leon]

Guys, ya'll should know how I feel about change on the board. I don't really like it unless it's an overwhelming situation. I already said I am neutral on this. I did vote and voted no, because that is how I generally feel about change. I think consistency is good. So far, I don't think there will be a change for a 60/40 split. If the percentage gets more skewed I am still open and still open anyway. That being said maybe this thread helped folks understand to consolidate when possible. Even if there is no change, if someone goes crazy and posts 10 in a row, as posted above, I assure everyone a simple PM to me will get those types of threads consolidated in about 2 minutes or less. That being said things can change. The individual T206 BST forum was a change that was well received by almost everyone and continues to flourish.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Leon,

I respect your opinion, but the topic of this discussion is the very reason that we limited the Live Auction section of the B/S/T to no more than 2-3 open posts at a time...and that's worked great IMO. So, why should other sections of the B/S/T be any different?

[Leon]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Leon,

I respect your opinion, but the topic of this discussion is the very reason that we limited the Live Auction section of the B/S/T to no more than 2-3 open posts at a time...and that's worked great IMO. So, why should other sections of the B/S/T be any different?

Auctions are more time sensitive than the other sections. Therefore it's even more important in that section, imo, than the others. Let's see how this shakes out.....

[shammus]

Its not really about the physical act of scrolling to the bottom of the page or clicking to go to page two. I think that everyone deserves a chance to have their thread be "above the fold" on the first page so that their posts are easily seen upon page load.

I voted "yes" so that i can have some degree of control over the situation. Really, Id be mostly wanting to prevent something a little more unusual, like what David showed us, from happening. So if someone posts 8 in a row or whatever, I can consolidate them. I don't know if we really need a formal rule, but I'd say anything over say, three or four posts at a time is getting kind of lofty.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by shammus

I voted "yes" so that i can have some degree of control over the situation. So if someone posts 8 in a row or whatever, I can consolidate them. I don't know if we really need a formal rule, but I'd say anything over say, three or four posts at a time is getting kind of lofty.

Its not really about the physical act of scrolling to the bottom of the page or clicking to go to page two. I think that everyone deserves a chance to have their thread be "above the fold" on the first page so that their auctions are easily seen upon page load.

If we see someone doing 5-10 in a row like that, I think we consolidate them first then let the offender know to be careful in the future. I am leaning towards it not being a rule either....If there is a rule about it I can see a lot more oversight being needed, which I am not in favor of at all.

[Seiklis]

I've been thinking this for awhile but we really need a new want list thread as it would reduce quite a bit of the clutter. Not sure if it would work best as just a big post as we normally do it or an updated first post as new needs are found.

[jhs5120]

The BST here is definitely too congested.

[AndyG09]

A bit off topic in regards to the number of threads, but sellers bumping their threads just to announce their item has sold is senseless. The edit feature is really helpful!


Best,

Andy

[Eric72]

Originally Posted by AndyG09

A bit off topic in regards to the number of threads, but sellers bumping their threads just to announce their item has sold is senseless.

I have only been a buyer on the BST so far. When receiving the card I purchased, I typically leave a post in the BST thread to let everyone know that the transaction went well.

Have I inadvertently been breaching etiquette by doing this?

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Eric72

I have only been a buyer on the BST so far. When receiving the card I purchased, I typically leave a post in the BST thread to let everyone know that the transaction went well.

Have I inadvertently been breaching etiquette by doing this?

No, I think confirming a good transaction is fine. It is mainly the selling of multiple similar items, in different threads, that is an issue.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by jhs5120

The BST here is definitely too congested.

Only 2 of 11 sections currently have less than a week of threads on the first page. I don't feel that is too congested. Some members will disagree.

[tschock]

Originally Posted by T206Collector

Don't blame your fading position on the B/S/T for why your item isn't selling. Check your asking price and the market interest in your item.

+1

I think those SELLING need to look at it from the BUYER'S perspective. As (mostly) a buyer, I check out a couple of the different BSTs every day or 2. It doesn't take me long to scroll through the "new" listings (very rarely even going to the next page). At this point I have 3 options if I decide to click the link for more info on an item that's listed to see if it's something I might be interested in buying: I want it, I don't want it, I'm not sure.

A ) If the price is for me a "buy it now", then I respond (PM or email) and get it. Case closed.
B ) If the price is too high, then YOUR position higher up could be construed as impeding MY finding something I might be interested in. At this point I don't care if I ever see it again, UNLESS the price is dropped/bumped. Maybe we need a rule to bump ONLY when there's a price change and not to jockey for position? (Just kidding, partly)
C ) If it's "iffy", then I might put a watch on the thread. At that point, bumping does nothing for me since I'm already "watching" the thread.

I think if we broke the survey down (and based already on the number of comments), we'd find the bulk of those wanting the change are mostly "sellers". And I think the bulk of the "buyers" would either not want the change or be indifferent to it.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by tschock

+1

I think those SELLING need to look at it from the BUYER'S perspective. As (mostly) a buyer, I check out a couple of the different BSTs every day or 2. It doesn't take me long to scroll through the "new" listings (very rarely even going to the next page). At this point I have 3 options if I decide to click the link for more info on an item that's listed to see if it's something I might be interested in buying: I want it, I don't want it, I'm not sure.

A ) If the price is for me a "buy it now", then I respond (PM or email) and get it. Case closed.
B ) If the price is too high, then YOUR position higher up could be construed as impeding MY finding something I might be interested in. At this point I don't care if I ever see it again, UNLESS the price is dropped/bumped. Maybe we need a rule to bump ONLY when there's a price change and not to jockey for position? (Just kidding, partly)
C ) If it's "iffy", then I might put a watch on the thread. At that point, bumping does nothing for me since I'm already "watching" the thread.

I think if we broke the survey down (and based already on the number of comments), we'd find the bulk of those wanting the change are mostly "sellers". And I think the bulk of the "buyers" would either not want the change or be indifferent to it.

If you look at the screen shot I posted (page 3, post 22), the member that started the 10 threads back to back was a BUYER (not a seller), so you're comments are really way off base. Besides, this is not a buyer/seller issue. It's a matter of simple common courtesy. People either have it or they don't.

Other forums have the same type rules about multiple threads. Here is the one from CU. I believe we need the same.

http://forums.collectors.com/message...hreadid=738361

[Leon]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

If you look at the screen shot I posted (page 3, post 22), the member that started the 10 threads back to back was a BUYER (not a seller), so you're comments are really way off base. Besides, this is not a buyer/seller issue. It's a matter of simple common courtesy. People either have it or they don't.

Other forums have the same type rules about multiple threads. Here is the one from CU. I believe we need the same.

http://forums.collectors.com/message...hreadid=738361

The PSA forums are good forums but are different than ours. I think they are a bit too heavy handed. Not a lot, but a bit. I prefer for our members to act responsibly themselves. I get PMs often concerning board issues. I want to know if someone is acting irresponsibly on our board. I would rather handle it that way (as a one-off) than have too many general rules. Also, in our poll here it doesn't seem too overwhelming to me.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by Leon

The PSA forums are good forums but are different than ours. I think they are a bit too heavy handed. Not a lot, but a bit. I prefer for our members to act responsibly themselves. I get PMs often concerning board issues. I want to know if someone is acting irresponsibly on our board. I would rather handle it that way (as a one-off) than have too many general rules. Also, in our poll here it doesn't seem too overwhelming to me.

I can appreciate that. Even if there are no rule changes, perhaps this discussion made those that are guilty aware of the situation and it won't be a problem in the future.

[shammus]

I'm ok with the rules the way they are, or I could handle a slight update to the rules in this regards. I'm fine with either. Either way, I'd like to be able to do a little consolidating if things start getting out of hand though. Maybe it would be appropriate to word it as the "right to merge/consolidate threads" if need be...

[Rob D.]

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=172449

[tschock]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

If you look at the screen shot I posted (page 3, post 22), the member that started the 10 threads back to back was a BUYER (not a seller), so you're comments are really way off base. Besides, this is not a buyer/seller issue. It's a matter of simple common courtesy. People either have it or they don't.

Other forums have the same type rules about multiple threads. Here is the one from CU. I believe we need the same.

http://forums.collectors.com/message...hreadid=738361

I saw that screen shot and went back and looked at all the pages SINCE that time on that BST and what I found is that this was the ONLY instance of more than 2 back-to-back threads. So 1 a month isn't that bad where we need a "rule" for it (IMHO). Granted, threads could have been updated between initial posting and the latest update, so it might not be 100% accurate when the thread was initially POSTED, but that only means that someone must have had interest or it was bumped by the OP.

Because it was a buyer and not a seller, it doesn't make my comments way off base. From what I've read in all the posts to date, it seems like most COMPLAINTS are from sellers, not buyers. Or at least in looking at the thread history of a number of those with this view, it seems they post more threads to sell than to buy/trade. But it WAS just a quick sampling.

The point wasn't about who posted or WHY, but it was an attempt to address the seller concerns about "bumping them down the list" and asking for a rule. I was simply trying to point out how I peruse the listings and why, as a buyer, this isn't a big deal to me.

I TOTALLY AGREE it's a common courtesy issue. And that people have it or they don't. But if you make it a rule, then it's not common "courtesy" anymore, is it? And why mask the character of those that abuse this privilege anyway?