Scoooby_doo & Shaggy

Yeah i agree, what could be done is if you post a thread you have to submit your paypal details, then if this was the case the customer could file a fraud investigation with paypal and even retain his money for items bought and scooby net could invoke this, also registered paypal and drivers license numbers can be given to police who would chase this as a fraud investigation

scoobynet are trying to make money off selling just like ebay

it also wouldnt be hard to ban that person from scooby net using IP addresses there are loads of ways this could be prevented but hence a money spinning cashing in in my eyes

Andie

Peanuts

iTrader: (15)

Do you not think that buyers have a responsibility to themselves to a certain extent?
You wouldn't hand over £100 to some pikey in the street on the premise that he will come back and give you your telly in ten minutes would you?

How is it different on Scoobynet?
You are hoping that everyone is an enthusiast?
How many genuine enthusiasts are there, maybe 5000?
How many members are there, I think there were 80,000 a few years ago now.
Accept some responsibility and take necessary precautions and help to reduce fraud.

I for one wouldn't be happy to have my details held by IB as I suspect they would be subject to US law and I also suspect that IB wouldn't want the responsibility either to be honest as DPA etc would apply.

Leave the system as it is and make people aware that the world isn't unfortunately chocolates and flowers
HTH

Scoooby_doo & Shaggy

you state in this quote that paid subscription people wont rip people off when this is untrue as i have been shown a few paid member not sending parcels nor payments of monies back witheld so i think this is a little bit of a over statement, i think you should investigate what it actually happening on Scoobynet

also you make a quote on this site as its a site for the community, charging people is not really a community thing to do, as some people cannot afford the subscription also, ebay doesnt have a subscrittpion and they manage ok

i feel that SN are using this as a anominity to just create revenue which is not really a comunity thing is it, the best way to make this site fraud free is by making parties when signing up for the SN username is by making a drivers license has to be given, obviously this would then be a link back to that person which in a fraudulant instances the offender would be traceable

this would entail anyone to be able to advertise parts etc and i can guarentee it would stop fraud, the police would get involved as this comes under the act for "Obtaining Money By Deception" this also would stand in a court of law, also it would also stand under Intent to fraud eitherway it would be a prosecutable offence

you would then not need to try put a subscription on SN for selling parts making Scoobynet one of the best community driven sites available

also you then state this s not like ebay, ebay doesnt have a subscription charge they charge for advertising, i think SN should look into external subaru specialists to subscribe for banners and payment this would then create a revenue from businesses and not the community, i believe there are lots of otherways this could have been achieved you just didnt look and as regards to Ford subsciptions do you really want to have your site associated to a FORD like forum???? i wouldnt, but thats just me!!!!

what you always forget moderators site owners and alike, your site is only good if you have the community, doing what has happened in the subscriptions as not cured a thing although one brightside is your making revenue off it which is not community, community means for every one to use charging subscriptions doesnt allow a community to intervene, and rubbing up communitys is not the way forward if everyone stood via solidarity and boycotted what site would you have then????

Just a thought from me but like i always say "I Am Good Me" i would have done strictly what i have said, no anonymous sales allowed unless proof of residence provided with backup of Drivrs license number,

sorted easy peasy

Andie

leecalcars

iTrader: (37)

I was a fully paid up member only 4 years or so ago never had this before, it's always buyer discretion I thought, never the less I'm nota member now but can still post in for sale section is thisbecause I have over 2000 posts please tell me and how much to join again not recieved any emails asking me too as I gladly would !

Lisawrx

iTrader: (1)

Hi, not sure why you can still post, can you actually post threads or just reply?

If you wish to join again, then just click the link 'Premium Membership' in the orangey bar near the top of the page and the membership options are there.

mickywrx

iTrader: (29)

Couldn't be bothered to read it all, however;

Ebay isn't free. It cost's money to sell on Ebay

Also have you not noticed the advertiser's banners? Possibly not if you're using an ad-blocker.

I've been a paid member since I bought my car 5 years ago - that reminds me, best renew my SN+ as it runs out soon.

Scoooby_doo & Shaggy

my gripe is when they bang on about a "community site" making it payable is not a community site, it take everything away from the normal user and what they state is because of the fraud but making it paid subscription has not stopped the fraud so if its not stopped it then make it free and try another way, if you put something on that doesnt work then you replace it and try something that does like i stated make litsing parts or forsale a part of you need to put your credit card or drivers lisence number this stops the fraud, paid subscriptions are another way of making money hiding behind the true fact, if they wanted to make it fraud free they need to make the initial registration non anonymous, proof of drivers license should do it, people then committing fraud will leave a stamp and traceable route back to them thus stopping the fraud no subscriptions needed to sell parts in our "Community Website" lol

New_scooby_04

iTrader: (4)

Whoa, whoa there sport.

I've just reviewed your post history on SN and I'd say pretty much all of your 53 posts on here have pertained to buying and selling items. In other words, on the basis of your posting history to date, you've used this site pretty much exclusively to trade. So, essentially, you're complaining because you can no longer do this for free. This might be a valid complaint if this BBS was promoted as a sales forum. However, as myself and several other mods have all said

SN is a chat community: if you come on here to just conduct transactions, then you're not really engaging with the community

So to start spouting rhetoric about how we're detracting from the community is a bit disingenuous IMO.

As for the new policy not working, this is nonsense. Where are all these instances of people getting ripped off by established paying members of which a couple on here have spoken of? I can find only one incident involving AVCR units and there appears to be a bit more to that that someone ripping others off: it appears to be a **** up that is being resolved. If anyone felt that there was grounds for civil or criminal action then we would have something to show the authorities if we were compelled to do so!

In contrast, I locked a thread earlier where someone is claiming getting ripped off by a member (non paying) with 5 posts! I'm guessing this happened because the buyer was circumventing the new policy and advice given in the above thread.

Suggestions about using driving licenses etc for ID would be inadequate and unworkable for a number of reasons e.g. we don't have the manpower to validate the information. Again, we're not Ebay, we're a chat forum.

As said before I was the one who made the ultimate push for this policy. I'm a mod, I get nothing from the revenue of this site, zip, nadda, nowt! So the idea that this has been done to make money is just not right! It was done to protect members and so far it seems to be working well!

If people undermine or circumvent the procedures we've put in place to try and protect them from scams, well they only have themselves to blame.

We'll never be able to protect people fully from themselves, nor should we.

Ns04

Scoooby_doo & Shaggy

Hi there

well in one instance you say its worked then in another instance you say it hasnt then further on you state its our own fault ermmmm not a cuminalised thing to state is it

I have also advertised in here as well as bought stuff, as you rightly put, although i have private pm`d other people with help on scooby issues, i have also been to other scooby net users houses to help out and try figure out problems to which i have suceeded in doing so, i have not just used this site for selling and buying etc..

A community thing should be put to the community a voting systems to see what they want to do not someone playing god forcing the act without a notion of understanding from us the users, i think this was the wrong thing to do and its too much for one or a small panel to decide this, its should have been vote casted

you state its our fault for being non vigilant hence we have been ripped off or ripping someone off, what kind of statement is that, you build your own community and circle of friends then finding which are applarable and who to deal with or not and even stateing that i would do a thing ripping someone off is defamation of character, which is accountable by law, or even suggesting this that anyone would do this its wrong andliable under the act stated, ever heard guilty until proven????

As a moderator you should know what you can write and cannot write

Andie Clarke

Lisawrx

iTrader: (1)

No offence, but have you actually properly read the post?

What NS04 is saying is that the instance we know of with a paid up member is more complicated than a scam, and it is hopefully being resolved. Not that the system is working then saying it isn't. So far I certainly haven't heard of scamming being a major issue as it was before this move.

As for saying about being your own fault, again you are picking out what you want there. What he is saying is, that if people try to get around the new rules by posting outside the for sale area (to avoid paying) and someone gets scammed as a result, they are in part to blame. That is certainly not saying it's ok, or that we are happy about that happening, but this measure was put in place in an attempt to help people. If they are going to take a risk when this has been done to cut down on scamming, they are not helping themselves and may get stung. For what it is worth, as I've said before, I can't believe people set out to rip people of their hard earned, but not everyone is decent and honest.

I'm not sure at all what you mean about defamation of character etc. as so far as I can see he hasn't personally accused anyone of anything.

I would say so far this system seems to have helped. And tbh, I think it's a minority who seem to have an issue with it. Many members have welcomed the change. Truthfully, members seem very happy to make quite a bit of money off the back of this site (which is not the primary purpose of it) yet have a huge issue putting their hand in their pocket and paying what is a small fee in a bid to aid protecting the decent members of the community.

We will probably never stop scamming completely, and members should exercise caution themselves, but we are only trying to help you guys out.

New_scooby_04

iTrader: (4)

As a moderator I can also see where someone appears to be attempting to obfuscate the pursuit of their own agenda by pointing the finger at others. Either that, or they haven't read my previous post properly!

If you had just said: I use this site mainly for buying and selling stuff, now I gotta pay, I'm pissed off, that would have been fair enough.

However, instead you try and portray yourself as some kind of representative of the community spirit or interests. Sorry mate, but with 53 posts at the time of my original E-mail (the vast majority of which are sales related) you're not in a position to do that. To reiterate, here is why:

You had, at the time of my original post, made 53 posts on this forum. It's on record for anyone who wants to look. They will also note that a very high proportion of them (pretty much all of them in fact) pertain to buying or selling items. At no point did I accuse you of any impropriety in your transactions, what I did say is that you were using the forum predominantly to enter into transactions. I then pointed at that, as myself and several other mods have said: the central purpose of this community is to provide a forum for people to chat, not to flog stuff! Thus, those who are on here predominantly to buy and sell are not engaging with the purpose of the community. Now, I'll entertain a debate with someone about community ethics who has engaged with the community, but I'm not going to stand back and watch a policy get trashed by someone who is basically disgruntled because SN is no longer free to trade on.

Please do not try and throw defamation of character at me. I'm not a barrister, but one cannot defame someone by simply citing facts and not making any accusation of impropriety. Whilst you have your head in the Webster's dictionary of law, you might also want to look up the term, "Fair Comment".

As for the policy not working, it is working just fine. Whether people like it or not the complaints we had over transactions on here in the past WERE almost exclusively directed at non-paying members. That is not to say that all non-paying members are crooked; far from it, the vast majority were no trouble at all! But having the facility to register on here with no verified, traceable details that one could follow up in the instance of a dispute, made the place highly susceptible to scammers, as many found out to their cost. Implementing a 'paying members can instigate trade only' policy removes this vulnerability to a very large extent. That does, unfortunately, mean that the honest non paying members suffer, but such is life! They can still buy stuff on SN and they will also benefit from the extra piece of mind the policy offers (for free, I might add!).

Since we have had the policy in place I'm not aware of one dispute that has not been/is in the process of being resolved. In fact, I'm only aware of one dispute pertaining to a paying member, full stop!

In terms of the comments about people being accountable for their own decisions when making purchases, well that's just a point of good sense.

If we advise people not to enter into transactions with individuals that this site has no traceable information about, they ignore us and get stung, then on their heads be it! We're not here to save people from themselves; we do what we reasonably can to prevent SN from being a hospitable place for scammers and in doing this try our best (with the limited resources we have) to protect the best interests of our members. If they choose to undermine such efforts, then they cannot absolve themselves of blame. It doesn't make any wrongdoing against them ok, but it does mean they have to accept responsibility for the fact they they chose to undermine the protection afforded to them and put themselves in a position where such an outcome was more likely and, as a result, got stung!

One cannot go around in life blaming others for not preventing them from making poor decisions/taking risks. Ultimately, you are responsible for your own decisions. In the context of buying and selling this is known, in layman's terms as "let the buyer beware".

Ns04

mickywrx

iTrader: (29)

Forum member/user first, moderator second. They can say what they want, same as you and I can.

Peanuts

iTrader: (15)

and it would appear that they can also do it with a disturbing use of over elaborate words and in a shockingingly patronising fashion too.
Sorry NS04 but clearly that is aimed at you:
for examples I present:

obfuscate the pursuit of their own agenda
spouting rhetoric about how we're detracting from the community is a bit disingenuous

and to rub it in a little:

Whoa, whoa there sport

is there a facepalm smilie on here?

New_scooby_04

iTrader: (4)

I would have never guessed

Like you I say it as I see it I guess!

Working on the facepalm smiley, for now just use the head bang against wall one!

Lee247

Just for you Ns-04

mickywrx

iTrader: (29)

This ones better;

Splitpin

NS, the one area where this new policy appears to not be working as intended is in the recent trend for "What is my Scooby worth?", or "what would I get for <insert extensive list of parts> if I sold them, let me know on <mobile telephone number>"-type threads.

I don't have any fundamental disagreement with the policy change but the difficulty comes when you have threads like the above, some of them blatantly taking the proverbial out of it, and most posted in places where they're off topic.

The knock-on effect of threads like that - if they're not jumped on pretty quick - is that sellers can attract interest which any subsequent buyer will have difficulty reporting on the board. In instances where sellers are less than scrupulous, doesn't this cause exactly the sort of scenario the policy change was designed to prevent?

New_scooby_04

iTrader: (4)

Hi mate,

Agree completely. This is why the policy is explicit in warning people about entering into transactions with those who are trying to circumvent the rules by, for example, putting an advert in a reply for a legitimate FS thread or contacting people by PM having seen them express an interest in something on the board.

The type of threads you point out are difficult. On the one hand, there is an argument for vaping them all, as the person who starts such a thread is clearly contemplating selling and -as such- the thread might be viewed as a FS thread in all but title. However, on the other hand, if the OP starts entertaining transactions in the thread or off the board, then the prospective buyer should smell a rat and RTM them.

As with so much of SN, we rely on the community to tell us when such transgressions occur using the RTM feature. We simply can't spot them all ourselves. Contrary to what some might tell you, we do try not to be too heavy handed as well!

People trying to circumvent the policy will have their posts removed and are subject to warnings/infractions/bans.

Those who consider buying from non-paying members (often newbies with no feedback) who are trying to advertise in contravention of the forum rules need to know they're taking a BIG risk and that there will be the square root of bugger all they can legitimately do about it if they get stung.

Think of it as a kick in the common sense, so to speak!

Lee247

I put a similar thread as you have mentioned, in Other Marques a while ago.
I was genuinely interested in what the car would be worth as it is ancient and I have no idea of such things
If I was looking for a sale, I would have checked I was able to do that, and put it in the correct place.
We are not all looking to take the pee.
I trust SN for useful answers and it seemed the obvious place to get what I needed to know.
It has generated a lot of interest, but it is still sitting in my garage, covered in dust
If and when I do decide to sell, it will be through the correct channels

ps: didn't like the facepalm smilies then, Ns-04

Will

Splitpin

Yep, agreed, as above I've not got any specific disagreement - although I would imagine it's caused the mod team an increase in workload trying to ensure it runs as intended?

Yeah, this is the other unfortunate aspect of it. There always have been people posting perfectly straightforward "I've got x or y, what's it worth" threads, and it follows that there will continue to be people wanting answers to questions like that without intending to circumvent the policy. I guess now it's the purview of the mods to decide what's now allowable and what isn't.

Lee247

Tough call and I have no idea how they can sort the genuine ones from the chancers.

mbayley77

iTrader: (4)

Why cant we have a thread which lists a title of what is being sold and an ebay number?

Ebay protects the buyer by having to use paypal etc. This takes it out of snet hands and protects the people involved?

your little system is not protecting anyone in my mind.

mickywrx

iTrader: (29)

Scoobynet isn't Egay. why should SN vicariously fund Egay?

Egay protects no one, except Egay. SN isn't Egay, and what you suggest makes it easier for scammers, not to mention more grief on SN.

Your mind is a little sheltered, IMO.

mbayley77

iTrader: (4)

Interesting as when goods havnt arrived when ordered from ebay I get my money back - Scoobynet on the other hand have seen me out of pocket by £700

Lisawrx

iTrader: (1)

No offence, but ebay doesn't protect anybody, they are there to make money while allowing people to trade, end of.

With ebay, you don't have to use paypal and people end up in the same situations as on here. Or, as has happened here also, people use paypal but go with the gift option to avoid charges and paypal can't help there if things go bad.

How many threads have been posted here by people claiming to have been scammed on ebay... Quite a few really.

Is our system not helping? Other than one situation recently involving a paid member (which I will add is seeming to be resolved), I haven't noticed alot of people claiming to have been scammed, and I note, scammed under the new system by a paying member. Whether or not it's down to the change, I can't say, but it seems to be the case.

At the end of the day, while buying or selling, there will always be a risk no matter what systems are in place. Whether it be here, ebay, autotrader, etc. the list goes on. Some people are dishonest, some too trusting.

This was put in place to try and help/deter, and so far I don't think it's going too badly. Nothing is fool proof, and nothing would please everyone, such is life unfortunately.

I think what some people miss here is that SN is not ebay, or just classifieds site, this is not it's purpose. It's a chat/advice forum. We could've sat back and done nothing and said tough if people get stung, they take the risk as 'it's just a forum', but we have tried to make it safer as we do care about our genuine members, believe it or not.

TimH

iTrader: (11)

And on that note, perhaps you should lock this thread?

If SNetters don't "get it" then they are either scammers, or are naive and, no matter what you do, will get scammed regardless...

StickyMicky

I couldn't care either way, while i have not owned a scooby for a year now, i stopped buying stuff from SN about 3-4 years ago as far to many people were getting ripped off, at least they have finally made some kind of "fixing" effort, although i am not so sure it is the best5 choice.

StickyMicky

PS. if this decision was not made to fill SN`s bulging coffers, then i suggest that anybody who pays JUST to sell, should have their charge donated to charidy


PPS. i was not aware that Simon and Shaun created this site, did they not take over the running of it, and then skin the thing in garish orange colouring?

PPPS. Still waiting for the "SN CLASSIC" forum skin that was promised..............

New_scooby_04

iTrader: (4)

I'm inclined to agree. I felt this should be up for discussion but the thread has clearly run its course and we're only making the same points ad nauseam.