BlackBerry Forums Support Community

BlackBerry Forums Support Community (http://www.blackberryforums.com/)
-   Site Suggestions, News & Problems (http://www.blackberryforums.com/site-suggestions-news-problems/)
-   -   Critical Replies On BST Forum...Why? (http://www.blackberryforums.com/site-suggestions-news-problems/236579-critical-replies-bst-forum-why.html)

davistld01 09-23-2010 09:32 AM

Critical Replies On BST Forum...Why?
 
The last two times I have posted on the Buy, Sell & Trade forum I have had members here and even a moderator post replies critisizing my deal, and even call me a liar. So, basically before I even get any PM's from prospective buyers/traders...I have to defend myself openly on a public forum. Why is this?

I am not alone. I have read replies to many members BST posts that have had the same treatment.

On other mobile phone specific forums that I'm an active member on, members are not allowed to post replies to the posts on the BST forums. They must reply to the OP via PM, and this keeps everything clean and private, as I feel it should be. If a moderator feels the post is a scam...he/she has the right to contact the member and confront them regarding the legitmacy of the post. Then, the mod has the option of deleting the thread and alerting the membership of a possible fraud. This seems to me like a much more fair way of doing things...and does not allow a moderator that has a heavy hand to voice his opinion publicly thereby tainting the transaction.

I'm not telling anybody how to run anything. This forum is yours and not mine. But, I've been here a while and have gleaned lots of information here. But I feel like there needs to be a change in the way members are treated on the BST forum. As it is, I'll never use that particular forum here for buying or selling devices.

NJBlackBerry 09-23-2010 09:47 AM

I am the moderator in question.

I quoted you as you changed the terms of the deal. You got offended.
All that was done is you changed the terms and were quoted. RIGHT?

If you choose not to sell here, that is your decision. I'm sure other forums are happy to provide you with a free service to conduct your selling.

Feel free, as is everyone, to read and post.

Just don't be quite so sensitive.

juwaack68 09-23-2010 09:56 AM

To the OP: The only BST thread I've seen from you was the one where you were asking for a "straight across trade" of a 9700 for a 9800, which is not even fair to the person with the 9800 (if you could even find someone willing to do that).

This is a public forum, with members able to post anything they like - questions, comments, concerns - so long as they are not attacking another member.

Nobody attacked you in that thread. Absolutely they (including myself) questioned your post and, at the same time, alerted potential 'buyers' that a "straight across trade" was not a good deal for them.

So you didn't like that people questioned that? Well, sorry you were offended by that, but if you had, as pointed out, initially posted you would add cash, the whole thing would have been avoided.

davistld01 09-23-2010 09:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NJBlackBerry (Post 1657830)
I am the moderator in question.

I quoted you as you changed the terms of the deal. You got offended.
All that was done is you changed the terms and were quoted. RIGHT?

If you choose not to sell here, that is your decision. I'm sure other forums are happy to provide you with a free service to conduct your selling.

Feel free, as is everyone, to read and post.

Just don't be quite so sensitive.

Truth be known...you said that if I would "tell the truth then others wouldn't have to do it for me". I did nothing but tell the truth...and when I'm called out and made out to be a liar, especially in a public forum...I am offended, as you probably would be as well. Perhaps you need to be a little less pointed in your statements as to the character of those you speak of.

My problem is not only with that, but allowing members to question or comment on the deal that is being posted...like it applies to them or is any of their business. If members don't agree with the terms being offered...and they are not interested in the deal anyway, why are they allowed to comment on the terms of the deal and taint the opinion of the potential buyer/seller/trader? Why not let the two parties negotiate the terms of the deal privately via PM? That just seems a lot more fair to me, personally.

JSanders 09-23-2010 09:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by davistld01
I am not alone. I have read replies to many members BST posts that have had the same treatment.

Show me links to "many".

I think it is right that any member of this forum (being a moderator or not) have the opportunity to question a deal posted in the BST section. I do it weekly to question new users with less than 10 posts, to ask them to post eBay or PayPal feedback links.

Looking back at your BST thread in question, no less than FOUR moderators questioned your offer, three of them before NJ made a comment. Perhaps those previous three comments should have alerted you to something.

NJBlackBerry 09-23-2010 10:02 AM

So people should not be able to express their opinions in an open, privately owned forum. Only you should be able to. Because people questioning the language aren't interested in your unbalanced trade?

Wow. Perhaps you should rethink your business ethics.

And that IS a criticism. To be 100% clear.

davistld01 09-23-2010 10:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NJBlackBerry (Post 1657836)
So people should not be able to express their opinions in an open, privately owned forum. Only you should be able to. Because people questioning the language aren't interested in your unbalanced trade?

Wow. Perhaps you should rethink your business ethics.

And that IS a criticism. To be 100% clear.

http://www.blackberryforums.com/buy-...800-torch.html

I'm not saying any of that...and you know it. Quit shifting the issue and be truthful...not evasive.

I have been in the retail sales business for 34-years, have bought and sold mobile devices on this and other forums for the past 7-years...and my business ethics have never been questioned until now. But, I consider the source...and your need to justify, so I understand your response.

The above link is the thread in question. I invite other members to have their opinions, and not just moderators...as this seems to have become a pile-on anyway.

NJBlackBerry 09-23-2010 10:11 AM

Whatever makes you happy. Since you aren't paying any attention to the mean mods anyway...

Enjoy. I'm done with this thread.

juwaack68 09-23-2010 10:11 AM

So let me ask you this:

If, as you wish would have happened, nobody had posted any questioning comments in that thread, AND someone actually contacted you to trade their 9800 for your 9700 - would you would have actually done a 'straight across trade'? Or would you have offered them cash as well, even though that wasn't part of your post?

davistld01 09-23-2010 10:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by juwaack68 (Post 1657839)
So let me ask you this:

If, as you wish would have happened, nobody had posted any questioning comments in that thread, AND someone actually contacted you to trade their 9800 for your 9700 - would you would have actually done a 'straight across trade'? Or would you have offered them cash as well, even though that wasn't part of your post?

I had, honestly thought about adding cash with the trade...but when I had come back later to the post, I could not edit to include that. I realized that the trade was somewhat uneven, and that any interested party would probably have requested some cash on top...and I was ready to do that if needed.

juwaack68 09-23-2010 10:32 AM

Well that's where I have a problem. You say 'if needed', which tells me that if someone had not asked for cash (if they had no clue what they were doing, perhaps) you would not have voluntarily offered cash.

At least, that's how I'm reading it.

As for not being able to edit the post, I believe the timeframe is 90 minutes (could be less...might even be zero for that forum) so that people cannot come back and edit things for their benefit (i.e., they post that something is 'ok', then sell it, have a dispute with the buyer, then go change the post to say it was 'damaged').

davistld01 09-23-2010 10:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JSanders (Post 1657834)
Show me links to "many".

I think it is right that any member of this forum (being a moderator or not) have the opportunity to question a deal posted in the BST section. I do it weekly to question new users with less than 10 posts, to ask them to post eBay or PayPal feedback links.

Looking back at your BST thread in question, no less than FOUR moderators questioned your offer, three of them before NJ made a comment. Perhaps those previous three comments should have alerted to something.

JSanders...you have the right to question users with less than 10-posts because it's the rules of the forum. And, it helps weed out those who have no history here and have not proven themselves trustworthy. I am only commenting on the right of other non-mod members to jump onboard and question the integrity of a deal or proposal, that's all.

I didn't notice the "no less than FOUR moderators" were in fact mods, until I got the treatment from the "Supermod" that I got. His comments calling me a liar were what set me off...and he had no right to do that. Of course, he'll certainly justify that, or bow out as he has because he was wrong and is getting called out for all to see.

All this being said, I won't bother you guys with any more BST posts only because I don't agree with the posture. I still appreciate this forum for the information that is freely given, and I'll hang around for that.

JSanders 09-23-2010 10:37 AM

I think the BST posts are not editable at all after posting, to keep someone from purposefully changing the term or the offer after a deal has been made.

But... there is always the ability to add an additional post in the thread, which davis certainly knows how to do.

My opinion is "let the buyer beware" and if a user wants a straight out trade of a 9800 for a 9700, so be it, that's the marketplace and if the marketplace will accept the deal, the two parties have every right to make that deal.

However, I think other users also should have every opportunity to point out that it's not exactly an even deal. The buyer can make their own decision.

Since davis' argument is with how we run the BST section of the forum... it's a closed subject. We aren't running this like HoFo and CB. Period.

NJBlackBerry 09-23-2010 10:40 AM

Cut the nonsense.

Here's the original thread - http://www.blackberryforums.com/buy-...800-torch.html

Where did anyone call you a liar?

You have ZERO credibility here right now. Anyone wanting to deal with you whould read these two threads first.

davistld01 09-23-2010 10:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by juwaack68 (Post 1657850)
Well that's where I have a problem. You say 'if needed', which tells me that if someone had not asked for cash (if they had no clue what they were doing, perhaps) you would not have voluntarily offered cash.

At least, that's how I'm reading it.

You're reading it incorrectly. But, even so...and if a member got his/her Torch for $199 which is the new-committment price through AT&T, and wanted to trade for my 9700, which is also $199 with new-contract on AT&T right now...and if both phones were as-new, then who's to say what would be fair? I have made similar trades when I was having issues with a phone, and I had gone past my 30-day exchange limits.

A member has complete and total right to trade any way he/she sees fit without the guidance of another member or a moderator/coach...isn't that true?

davistld01 09-23-2010 10:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NJBlackBerry (Post 1657856)
Cut the nonsense.

Here's the original thread - http://www.blackberryforums.com/buy-...800-torch.html

Where did anyone call you a liar?

You have ZERO credibility here right now. Anyone wanting to deal with you whould read these two threads first.

What is THIS statement then?

"Tell the truth and people wouldn't have to do it for you."

What do you call that? In my world that's calling someone a liar...pure and simple.

Whatever...there's a no-win deal here especially with who I'm dealing with. I'm done. Peace out.

NJBlackBerry 09-23-2010 10:46 AM

Good. Goodbye.

You changed the terms of a deal and got caught. And you objected. OOPS.

davistld01 09-23-2010 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NJBlackBerry (Post 1657860)
Good. Goodbye.

You changed the terms of a deal and got caught. And you objected. OOPS.

You have a wonderful day as well, NJBlackBerry! ;-)

akosnitzky 09-23-2010 11:34 AM

Hello.
I am sorry if you felt your integrity was questioned and we do not question every deal. However, as part of being on a private site which operates with transparency, we feel its our responsibility to question a deal which we think in our opinion is a bit one-sided. We would provide you with the same benefit if we thought you were on the "short side of the stick"

Our members are consumers of information and have the right to buy from you if they choose. All we did is advise. If you expect a laissez-faire approach, then you will never be satisfied with us or the BST site. By the way, our approach I believe has reduced PayPal disputes and preserved many seller's reputations with that service


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:08 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.12
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.