Community Feedback - Posting private messages (7 Viewers)

[Sambukan]

What a shit show. Some of the no-voters act like a yes-vote automatically means we’re gonna post all of your PMs for no good reason. I wouldn’t post anyone’s PMs unless in the very rare instance where I had to clear my name or something of that nature. I don’t expect that’ll happen but it still means it’s a greater than zero percent chance, hence I voted yes

Why is it less of a shit show from the yes voters? I dont get it

 

[Eriks]

Why is it less of a shit show from the yes voters? I dont get it

Because we’re not irrationally screaming about some non-existing privacy threat

 

[Sambukan]

Because we’re not irrationally screaming about some non-existing privacy threat

Lol pretty good or easy argument by you

 

[upNdown]

What a shit show.

yes

 

[Sambukan]

Because we’re not irrationally screaming about some non-existing privacy threat

The yes voters on the other hand are screaming about the nonstop threats of their reputations..

 

[SiouxperStack]

Iam not afraid of anything (lool sounds pretty cool)
It is what kind of community you want. Do you want respect, integrity, moral? Or you want that everyone polices everyone and as soon as someone sees the need to safe their reputation (who will decide that?) or anythingelse they post pm's. Not a fun and very community like idea. Who will be the judge, jury?

It would be pretty clear to see if someone is prtotecting their name or being an ass. I believe the members can police themselves without this being an issue. Is it currently a problem now?

 

[Irish]

Iam not afraid of anything (lool sounds pretty cool)
It is what kind of community you want. Do you want respect, integrity, moral? Or you want that everyone polices everyone and as soon as someone sees the need to safe their reputation (who will decide that?) or anythingelse they post pm's. Not a fun and very community like idea. Who will be the judge, jury?

We want the same thing, just very different ways of going about it. I would like a free and open forum with a few basic ground rules - and that type of forum will ultimately police itself. If someone is constantly being a jerk and showing PMs in public - eventually no one will trust them and send them PMs. Reputations (especially good ones) are built up over time through lots of interactions and transactions. Your actions - both publicly and privately - are the ultimate "judge" of your rep. So yes, after 15 years in the hobby, if someone said something false about me publicly about a private transaction, I'd call them out on it. And if ultimately they refuse to retract their lie, I would consider presenting the facts to expose that lie. *Consider. If the person is already known to be a jerk/liar, I probably wouldn't waste my time. But I don't need a mod or "judge" to fight my battles for me. There are already enough rules and too much moderation here to begin with, IMHO we don't need more.

 

[inca911]

 

[Sambukan]

We want the same thing, just very different ways of going about it. I would like a free and open forum with a few basic ground rules - and that type of forum will ultimately police itself. If someone is constantly being a jerk and showing PMs in public - eventually no one will trust them and send them PMs. Reputations (especially good ones) are built up over time through lots of interactions and transactions. Your actions - both publicly and privately - are the ultimate "judge" of your rep. So yes, after 15 years in the hobby, if someone said something false about me publicly about a private transaction, I'd call them out on it. And if ultimately they refuse to retract their lie, I would consider presenting the facts to expose that lie. *Consider. If the person is already known to be a jerk/liar, I probably wouldn't waste my time. But I don't need a mod or "judge" to fight my battles for me. There are already enough rules and too much moderation here to begin with, IMHO we don't need more.

I Appreciate your explanation. And i can understand this even if i dont completely agree with it.

 

[ekricket]

We want the same thing, just very different ways of going about it. I would like a free and open forum with a few basic ground rules - and that type of forum will ultimately police itself. If someone is constantly being a jerk and showing PMs in public - eventually no one will trust them and send them PMs. Reputations (especially good ones) are built up over time through lots of interactions and transactions. Your actions - both publicly and privately - are the ultimate "judge" of your rep. So yes, after 15 years in the hobby, if someone said something false about me publicly about a private transaction, I'd call them out on it. And if ultimately they refuse to retract their lie, I would consider presenting the facts to expose that lie. *Consider. If the person is already known to be a jerk/liar, I probably wouldn't waste my time. But I don't need a mod or "judge" to fight my battles for me. There are already enough rules and too much moderation here to begin with, IMHO we don't need more.

Everybody’s worried about their reputation - what about getting physical threats via PM? If you get physically threatened by someone in a PM should you have any recourse to protect yourself? What if you notify admins but they just shrug?

How about posting PM’s and other info from other sites?

 

[Pinkdan]

View attachment 685730

 

[MatB]

I changed my vote to I DONT CARE

 

[MatB]

And why the F would anyone care if there was a rubber ducky group buy?

What in the panty twister world do we live in where ADULTS get upset about shit like that?

Oh.. that's right, I forgot. The kind of world where being a Karen is a thing.

Carry on

 

[pltrgyst]

I think it should be banned. It is IMO an “asshole move” that will surely become the norm in time if it it’s allowed.
...
It’s a childish, unethical and stupid thing for someone to do IMO. Be better members of this community than that.

Chipper A, without directly posting their pm exchange, repeatedly lies about a deal that fell through with Chipper B. The lies, if allowed to stand unrefuted or left as "he said/she said", would greatly damage the reputation of Chipper B.

You think it would be "childish, unethical and stupid" for Chipper B to post the actual pms in question?

 

[BonScot]

Chipper A, without directly posting their pm exchange, repeatedly lies about a deal that fell through with Chipper B. The lies, if allowed to stand unrefuted or left as "he said/she said" would greatly damage the reputation of Chipper B.

You think it would be "childish, unethical and stupid" for Chipper B to post the actual pms in question?

This is exactly why I voted “yes”.

I’ve never published a PM and don’t ever plan to but it’s a good safety net to have and I think that it acts as a deterrent to shenanigans.

 

[Sambukan]

The fear of a damaged reputation must be real...

 

[Pinkdan]

Chipper A, without directly posting their pm exchange, repeatedly lies about a deal that fell through with Chipper B. The lies, if allowed to stand unrefuted or left as "he said/she said" would greatly damage the reputation of Chipper B.

You think it would be "childish, unethical and stupid" for Chipper B to post the actual pms in question?

Interesting. This was the first argument that gave me pause, hmmm good point

 

[davethesave]

I skimmed most of the thread.

IF the private message resolves an issue then yes post it. But at that point it is understood that there are no other resolutions available.

 

[Sambukan]

The fear of a damaged reputation must be real..

Chipper A, without directly posting their pm exchange, repeatedly lies about a deal that fell through with Chipper B. The lies, if allowed to stand unrefuted or left as "he said/she said" would greatly damage the reputation of Chipper B.

You think it would be "childish, unethical and stupid" for Chipper B to post the actual pms in question?

Is this all it takes to damage someones reputation in this "community"?

 

[JMC9389]

The fear of a damaged reputation must be real...

On a site where thousands of dollars of collectibles changes hands on a daily basis, your word is just about all you have if you want to sell something.

 

[Lil Tuna]

Chipper A, without directly posting their pm exchange, repeatedly lies about a deal that fell through with Chipper B. The lies, if allowed to stand unrefuted or left as "he said/she said" would greatly damage the reputation of Chipper B.

You think it would be "childish, unethical and stupid" for Chipper B to post the actual pms in question?

Not necessarily in that example. My point is that it should always be a last resort. My thoughts are this, if it was banned, it might force members to work out the drama amongst themselves.
Maybe it would encourage better “conducting of ones self” behind the scenes which in turn might keep the nonsense to a minimum in the open forum.
I use the word “might” very lightly in the last sentence, I’m most likely wrong but it was a thought my friend.

 

[BonScot]

Not necessarily in that example. My point is that it should always be a last resort. My thoughts are this, if it was banned, it might force members to work out the drama amongst themselves.
Maybe it would encourage better “conducting of ones self” behind the scenes which in turn might keep the nonsense to a minimum in the open forum.
I use the word “might” very lightly in the last sentence, I’m most likely wrong but it was a thought my friend.

I think that most of the “yes” voters mean to use it as a last resort. If I ever find myself in the unenviable position of considering publishing a PM because of an unresolved dispute I would tell the person that I was planning on doing so unless we could reach an amicable conclusion.

I think that if there’s a blanket ban on publishing PMs that could encourage douchebaggery in some less scrupulous people...

 

[pltrgyst]

My point is that it should always be a last resort.

Agreed. But that is not easy for mods (or Tommy) to determine...

 

[Sambukan]

On a site where thousands of dollars of collectibles changes hands on a daily basis, your word is just about all you have if you want to sell something.

That is kind of sad. Arent here a lot of people friends? To me it seems it would also help to not bring out the lynchmob right away and judge the person by your own experience with him

 

[JMC9389]

Is this all it takes to damage someones reputation in this "community"?

Absolutely. I've seen new people that don't know the process when they first sign up here make mistakes and despite fixing them, resulted in them getting black balled.

The only way to determine if someone here is trustworthy is to read their feedback and to ask for third party references. I bought something several weeks ago from a new PCF'er that had no feedback and no references to speak of. Because of this, I made different arrangements from what is usually orthodox here, and he delivered as promised and I gave him positive feedback so he can be considered trusted from my positive experience. Act shady and dodgy when it comes time for payment, or if I decide to pay and get burnt, negative feedback it is.

The feedback system is really underutilized here. If it's used most of the time, there really should be no need for the kangaroo court trials (thanks @Perthmike ) that take place here when a misunderstanding takes place, as it usually is 99% of the time. In the case of an outright scammer or thief, let Tommy and the mod team do their job and perma ban them from the community.

 

[JMC9389]

That is kind of sad. Arent here a lot of people friends? To me it seems it would also help to not bring out the lynchmob right away and judge the person by your own experience with him

A lot of the OG's and chippers that have been in the community a long time and go to meetups regularly, yes, they know each other and there's a high level of trust, I'm sure.

But someone like me, coming into this hobby two years ago, not having been to a meet up, and not meeting anyone here except for a few of the local guys that post here too, my word is all I have, yes. If I sell something and someone questions my sale or whether I can be trusted, I can give a long line of references and refer them to my feedback page to give assurance that I'm not going to rip them off. That, and I took the time to research and read about how things work here before I sold something so I didn't look ignorant, and treated everyone with respect to show that I can be trusted.

Act like an ass or defensive, especially early on, and your reputation and trustworthiness is really hard to get back once it's lost.

 

[Sambukan]

A lot of the OG's and chippers that have been in the community a long time and go to meetups regularly, yes, they know each other and there's a high level of trust, I'm sure.

But someone like me, coming into this hobby two years ago, not having been to a meet up, and not meeting anyone here except for a few of the local guys that post here too, my word is all I have, yes. If I sell something and someone questions my sale or whether I can be trusted, I can give a long line of references and refer them to my feedback page to give assurance that I'm not going to rip them off. That, and I took the time to research and read about how things work here before I sold something so I didn't look ignorant, and treated everyone with respect to show that I can be trusted.

Act like an ass or defensive, especially early on, and your reputation and trustworthiness is really hard to get back once it's lost.

I get it and appreciate the discussion. Even if it is hard for me to think like that. I probably damaged my reputation enough with this thread
I just feel as said before, maybe it would help to let the pitchforks in the bag and not calling for a lynchmob that fast(dont know if that is really an expression in english) , so a reputation cant be damaged that easy by one statement. But i think i got it and really appreciate the discussion, which imo is important to have. But now i see myself out before nobody wants to sell me chips again

 

[BGinGA]

Not necessarily in that example. My point is that it should always be a last resort. My thoughts are this, if it was banned, it might force members to work out the drama amongst themselves.
Maybe it would encourage better “conducting of ones self” behind the scenes which in turn might keep the nonsense to a minimum in the open forum.
I use the word “might” very lightly in the last sentence, I’m most likely wrong but it was a thought my friend.

I understand your position and rationale, but it's not what I've seen transpire under actual conditions similar to what you describe.

The deterrent of being publicly outed as untruthful (with proof) actually encourages the better conduct you seek behind the scenes.

Just my opinion and experience, not gospel.

 

[JustinInMN]

I don’t think anyone answering yes is arguing that PMs should be shared lightly but rather that there are (rare) instances where it could be deemed appropriate.

I agree with this, but that's not really the poll question. Without a qualifier of "under certain circumstances" I interpret the poll to mean "under any circumstances" which is a hard NO from me.

The reason is simple: The Yes crowd demonstrates an understanding of respect. That is the first and foremost thing I look for in a secret-keeping buddy.

Voting "NO" also seems to be about respect for keeping secrets.

Chipper A, without directly posting their pm exchange, repeatedly lies about a deal that fell through with Chipper B. The lies, if allowed to stand unrefuted or left as "he said/she said", would greatly damage the reputation of Chipper B.

You think it would be "childish, unethical and stupid" for Chipper B to post the actual pms in question?

This is a circumstance where I would clearly support sharing PMs. But again, I don't think this is what the poll question is really asking. So I guess my stance is if you need to defend yourself from an accusation, absolutely, if you don't, I think the expectation of privacy is still paramount, especially if one has nefarious intent of revealing PMs to twist context or because something that makes sense in a small audience changes for a large one.

So I am still a NO on the question as asked, and I am 39.

If the qualifier of "under certain circumstances" were added to the original question, it would change my vote and I think change the poll drastically.

 

[TheDuke]

So all of the rationale for posting a PM publicly seems to stem from the idea of protecting one's reputation about a deal going bad or something to that effect.

How many times has that actually happened in the history of PCF?

Can anyone please provide concrete examples where it was actually necessary to post a PM?

Or are people just arguing about hypotheticals?