One rule that I would like to see enforced is that of people posting for sale threads with "buyer to pay PayPal fees". Surely if the seller is requesting the buyer pay the fees, which is against Paypal's policy, they should just post the price inclusive? It's a pain as a buyer to then have to go and work out how much I'm expected to pay. I know there are fees calculators, but surely that should be seller's responsibility?
There now also seems to be an underlying assumption that length of membership is in some way linked to how seriously a suggestion or complaint should be dealt with. More of the same then , eh!
A hypothetical, but potentially real question based on events of the last couple of months:
1. An item currently in production is posted on BST for which the price being asked is way out of step with reality.
2. A frankenrazor incorrectly labelled as a rare historic piece such as a double ring
In other words both are potentially a trap for newbies and others not up to speed on such matters and the issues are matters of fact, not opinion
I PM the seller who either ignores my message or tells me to stick it where the sun doesn't shine
In the event of this occurring, if I reported the BST post, would the mod team intervene, even deleting the BST post if no other option is available?
I can't speak for anyone else but at no point did I call you or anyone else "power crazed" I was simply appealing for what I thought was a more considered common sense approach to the issue I had with my BST post. You are absolutely right, these matters are not life and death affairs and that should be reflected in everyone's behaviour, members and moderators alike. There doesn't seem much point in carrying on this topic since it's pretty clear nothing will be changing. I'm fine with that and at least happy I've aired my views on the subject regardless of the status quo remaining the same in the end. I think it's a shame relevant information can't be exchanged in a bst thread but if that's what the majority of members are happy with then so be it.I count 16 posters in this thread, not all of them of your point of view (or mine). For simplicity I'll assume they're all of your mind that the moderators here are all (as we've been described previously) "power crazed".
Today (so far) there have been 357 active registered users.
So it appears at first glance that less than 5% have an issue.
This is a shaving forum, it's not actually a matter of life and death.
I count 16 posters in this thread, not all of them of your point of view (or mine). For simplicity I'll assume they're all of your mind that the moderators here are all (as we've been described previously) "power crazed".
Today (so far) there have been 357 active registered users.
So it appears at first glance that less than 5% have an issue.
This is a shaving forum, it's not actually a matter of life and death.
Totally agree 100%. I actually prefer 'laissez-faire'* as a political strategy as well (side discussion)....we have historically been very much laissez-faire - but with the corollary that the members adhered to the spirit of the rules if not the letter of them (and the rules themselves are few and not onerous) by self-control. If that self-control is lost, then the obvious consequence is that moderation must become more active.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?