BST consolidation issues, question?

[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?