Complaining about deals that have gone bad in the GUU Forum

[3arod13]

I spend more time reading threads each day than starting one myself. However, there always seems to be that one GUU rule violation that happens often - complaining about a deal that has gone bad in the GUU Forum.

I was just following a thread, when all of a sudden it was deleted. I will say it was deleted after a warning was given to the poster of the thread. Why? Because the poster of the thread was upset over a deal that went bad, and understandably, let their emotions get the best of them.

As I have learned myself in this forum, you just can't do that. As some of you may recall, I had an issue with someone and brought it into this forum. Yes, I was upset. And yes, I ignored the numerous warnings to be patient, give the other person the opportunity to respond, and to get all the facts first before I speak bad about the person. My emotions were boiling, so I wasn't hearing all of that. After looking back on it, I let my emotions get the best of me and realize now that I pushed the envelope with the administrators to a point that I regret.

What I learned from that experience was to control my emotions. Difficult as it was, I have now changed my ways to ensure I don't cross those lines again. I even had another issue that happened, but instead of posting in GUU, I contacted one of the administrators via email with my situation and was given really good advice on how to handle it. Never had to post anything about it in this forum because I was able to work it out, due to the advice and guidance of the administrator.

Now, some may read this and think, "who does he think he is giving us advice? or Who does he think he is, and GUU administrator?" No, I'm just a person who experienced the experience myself...learned from it...and believe overall it makes a difference in this forum and those individuals involved. So, if I can share information that I think mayl benefit anyone when dealing with this subject, then good.

With that said, Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to you and your families.

[Neely8]

Arod,
I appreciate the insight but I don't feel that I crossed any lines or posted anything that wasn't factual. I feel I got the short end of the moderating stick due to a moderator's association with the subject of the deleted thread. I don't think I posted anything that warranted the total censorship of the thread and didn't realize disagreeing in a civil manner with a moderator warranted such action. This site just lost a lot of credibility in my eyes if they do not want the collecting community to be made aware of how poorly some collectors handle transactions on here. John.

[3arod13]

Arod,
I appreciate the insight but I don't feel that I crossed any lines or posted anything that wasn't factual. I feel I got the short end of the moderating stick due to a moderator's association with the subject of the deleted thread. I don't think I posted anything that warranted the total censorship of the thread and didn't realize disagreeing in a civil manner with a moderator warranted such action. This site just lost a lot of credibility in my eyes if they do not want the collecting community to be made aware of how poorly some collectors handle transactions on here. John.

John, I totally understand and I felt the same as you did in my situation. However, after reflecting on it, there were things I could have done differently.

I'm not downplaying what happened to you. I read the entire thread before it was deleted and feel your pain. What was done, was wrong. But once the warning was issued, I feel you should have given it a little more time. Just my thoughts!

Here's a recommendation: If a dealing goes on between individuals in this forum that goes bad, maybe GUU can give both parties involved a timeline to respond in GUU. If either fail to do so within that amount of time, then individuals can share more details and/or action be taken.

Just a thought.

[bigtruck260]

I was also following that thread and have 2 observations.

The initial complaint was a valid one, but one that required some time for the accused memeber to respond.

The admin. did issue warnings, but (this is only my opinion) did post a comment in favor of the accused after warning him and editing the thread ...which could have led the original poster to think that the admin. was stacking the deck in the buyer's favor in the court of GUU opinion.

However, regardless of that - the seller should have stopped posting after being warned, and waited until the buyer could respond.

I see both sides, and will remember that if it ever happens to me. I still think feedback here means 2000% more than the generic (and limited) eBay method.

Again, just an observation. Understood if someone disagrees with me...

Dave

[ChrisCavalier]

Hello Everyone,

I wanted to take a moment to post a clarification relating to the thread that was deleted. The thread was removed because it was not congruent with the overall objectives of the forum, not because of personalities, emotions, etc.

Specifically, the purpose of the forum (thanks to Eric Stangel) is intended to bring game used collectors together and help hobbyists educate one another. The purpose of the forum is not to post specific personal situations that do not really involve the rest of the community. We do not see those type of situations as adding value to the overall community and it is not where the administrators of the site should be spending their energies. The energies of the administrators should be spent helping achieve the goals stated above as well as focusing on additions to the site (which we are working now) that will continue to provide added value to the collective community.

While there may have been differences of opinions and frustrations involved in that personal dealing, the GUU administrators are not going to spend their time trying to mediate a personal situation that occurred between two parties and does not really have relevance to the overall community. If there was some type of fraud or illegal misconduct (and could be proven) that might be something that could benefit the community to know. However, this particular situation involved none of those things. Therefore, it was removed.

Sincerely,
Chris

[beavisrules]

Chris,

I understand and respect your stance, but do have a question. I read the thread as well before it got deleted.

You said "We do not see those type of situations as adding value to the overall community" - however, one thing that I think was pertinant is the fact that the buyer sent a personal check, then put a stop on it without proper warning, which could cost the seller bank fees. This, to me, is very relevant, in that it is something I'd want to be aware of in case this individual buyer were to ever buy another item from me (he bought something from me off ebay and paid with paypal - no issues occurred), as I would not accept a personal check from him after hearing this episode unless the buyer could respond and explain what happened. While I agree that personal attacks need to be moderated, to me this is significant to know that a buyer would pull this manuever, and I think warranted the buyer to tell his side of the story should any of us deal with him in the future. Thoughts?

[ahuff]

I agree with Beavis. If this had taken place between one forum member and someone on ebay, the moderators position is legit. Certainly energies could be better spent elsewhere.

However, the fact that this took place between two fellow forum members does involve this forum. One is the obvious - they probably were introduced by this forum. Second, it would seem very important that the moderators allow this a forum to be one that we feel secure to trade/buy/sell in. If that can't be done, then most areas of its existence are compromised. That is my 2 cents.

[ChrisCavalier]

Hello Michael and Bryan,

There are two factors here at work here:

1) There was nothing fraudulent that took place in that situation and it was more of a personal grievance between two parties. That is beyond the scope of the forum.

2) We re-instituted the old "For Sale" forum at the request of our members even though we don't think it is the best way to facilitate transactions on the site. We would have rather waited until the new platform is ready but we did it as a favor to our members.

As such, we are not going to spend our time moderating personal differences on a platform that we knew would be vulnerable to differences based on the way items are transacted. This is not the only time we have been expected to moderate such differences which fall outside the scope of the forum. If that is the expectation from members than we can simply remove the existing "For Sale" forum until the new platform is ready.

We go out of our way to help people in every way. As a matter of fact, I have personally received requests and provided help to at least a half a dozen people over the last few weeks that had issues with other entities in the hobby. However, I think expecting GUU personnel to spend their time mediating personal differences arising from a forum that we didn't feel comfortable allowing to begin with is a bit much to ask.

Sincerely,
Chris

[mvandor]

You said "We do not see those type of situations as adding value to the overall community" - however, one thing that I think was pertinant is the fact that the buyer sent a personal check, then put a stop on it without proper warning, which could cost the seller bank fees. This, to me, is very relevant, in that it is something I'd want to be aware of in case this individual buyer were to ever buy another item from me (he bought something from me off ebay and paid with paypal - no issues occurred), as I would not accept a personal check from him after hearing this episode unless the buyer could respond and explain what happened. While I agree that personal attacks need to be moderated, to me this is significant to know that a buyer would pull this manuever, and I think warranted the buyer to tell his side of the story should any of us deal with him in the future. Thoughts?

I agree. Frankly, I'm getting a growing sense of an over moderation here. As a collector, I want to know others bad experiences to learn from them as well as to red flag me on questionable business practices of various individuals and companies.

[sammy]

I second this statement.

I agree. Frankly, I'm getting a growing sense of an over moderation here. As a collector, I want to know others bad experiences to learn from them as well as to red flag me on questionable business practices of various individuals and companies.

One of the reasons I don't post very much anymore is because of the thought police. I see postings that are not direct subject matter, and nothing is deleted, yet I see the same type of postings by others and these are deleted. Don't really care for the bias.