General discussion thread - keep the other threads clean 29 29

[NP_Gresham]

Just now, KPR Comics said:

How is what I said opposite of anything?  If the default is No Returns, then that is the default.

Default is returns accepted. 

Paypal has a long return window, unless a seller say otherwise and they use PayPal then the returns are spelled out by PayPal.

If that does not work then the seller has to say so or the PP policy prevails

 

 

[KPR Comics]

6 minutes ago, NP_Gresham said:

Default is returns accepted. 

Paypal has a long return window, unless a seller say otherwise and they use PayPal then the returns are spelled out by PayPal.

If that does not work then the seller has to say so or the PP policy prevails

 

 

I'm not arguing real world policy.  I'm just saying that the default in the CGC board sales thread rules world can be No Returns.

[NP_Gresham]

4 minutes ago, KPR Comics said:

I'm not arguing real world policy.  I'm just saying that the default in the CGC board sales thread rules world can be No Returns.

And I am saying that PayPal has terms of use,

If you use PayPal you MUST accept returns or say otherwise.

There already IS a default. Unless a seller refuses PayPal.

 

Edited December 12, 2018 by NP_Gresham

[KPR Comics]

3 minutes ago, NP_Gresham said:

And I am saying that PayPal has terms of use,

If you use PayPal you MUST accept returns or say otherwise.

There already IS a default. Unless a seller refuses PayPal.

 

Then why do threads get pulled if they don't state a return policy?  

[NP_Gresham]

1 minute ago, KPR Comics said:

Then why do threads get pulled if they don't state a return policy?  

Why not have a 90 day default?

Having "No returns" unstated is a violation of PP terms of use.

There is a conflict with PP terms of use that can only be resolved by stating a return policy

[KPR Comics]

Just now, NP_Gresham said:

Why not have a 90 day default?

Having "No returns" unstated is a violation of PP terms of use.

There is a conflict with PP terms of use that can only be resolved by stating a return policy

That works for me.  Point being, just make some sort of default and Sellers can choose to opt out or modify.  I 100% want and support returns, but would rather policing efforts to be focused on the true offenders (multi-site listings, PP F&F, incessant bumping, etc.)

[NP_Gresham]

Besides what's so hard about stating "No Returns" ?

I buy from threads all the time that state this if I know the seller and the scans are clear.

[NP_Gresham]

Just now, KPR Comics said:

That works for me.  Point being, just make some sort of default and Sellers can choose to opt out or modify.  I 100% want and support returns, but would rather policing efforts to be focused on the true offenders (multi-site listings, PP F&F, incessant bumping, etc.)

agree

[cmcfan]

I just want to make it clear, that I am all about following the rules, that is not the debate.  The point I was making is that instead of completely pulling a thread, especially for not stating something as simple as a return policy(which can be fixed quickly in editing) why not just reach out to the seller and let them know,"you are violating a rule and to please adjust your thread or it will be pulled"?  How is that not a better solution for everyone?  Better communication with moderators and an environment that feels more community based.  Again it's not about just following the rules, over sights happen so as a friendly community that we are all passionate about hoping for some better communication isn't to much to ask for.  People do accidentally make mistakes. 

[skypinkblu]

 

[entalmighty1]

On 12/12/2018 at 6:30 PM, cmcfan said:

I just want to make it clear, that I am all about following the rules, that is not the debate.  The point I was making is that instead of completely pulling a thread, especially for not stating something as simple as a return policy(which can be fixed quickly in editing) why not just reach out to the seller and let them know,"you are violating a rule and to please adjust your thread or it will be pulled"?  How is that not a better solution for everyone?  Better communication with moderators and an environment that feels more community based.  Again it's not about just following the rules, over sights happen so as a friendly community that we are all passionate about hoping for some better communication isn't to much to ask for.  People do accidentally make mistakes. 

I agree with the sentiment, and I think I read somewhere that they used to do that.  I believe the current regime is looking to avoid long argumentative PM's over rule violations, so they just choose to yank them preemptively.

[revat]

1 hour ago, entalmighty1 said:

I agree with the sentiment, and I think I read somewhere that they used to do that.  I believe the current regime is looking to avoid long argumentative PM's over rule violations, so they just choose to yank them preemptively.

I think you’re right.  I assume they think it’s more fair to just pull it, lest arguments occur over why this guy got his pulled faster than that guy or whatever.   Just take the subjectiveness and potential arguments out of it.  

I agree that it’s harsh, but I also agree that it’s relatively easier to apply the policy evenly, which I get.  We’re not paying to be on this site, and mods aren’t paid to arbitrate.

[thehumantorch]

3 hours ago, entalmighty1 said:

I agree with the sentiment, and I think I read somewhere that they used to do that.  I believe the current regime is looking to avoid long argumentative PM's over rule violations, so they just choose to yank them preemptively.

I can see why they yank a thread to prevent problems that crop up before the OP can address the issue.  Couldn’t the mods lock the thread and then unlock it when the OP agrees to correct it?  Makes a lot more sense than discarding the OPs work

[Patriot6]

10 minutes ago, thehumantorch said:

I can see why they yank a thread to prevent problems that crop up before the OP can address the issue.  Couldn’t the mods lock the thread and then unlock it when the OP agrees to correct it?  Makes a lot more sense than discarding the OPs work

Best idea yet!

[NP_Gresham]

The rules are posted.

Seems easy enough, maybe i am missing something

[revat]

2 hours ago, thehumantorch said:

I can see why they yank a thread to prevent problems that crop up before the OP can address the issue.  Couldn’t the mods lock the thread and then unlock it when the OP agrees to correct it?  Makes a lot more sense than discarding the OPs work

Not a bad idea.  But why would the mods want to do more work when they’re not the ones who messed up?  They certainly could be more considerate about it, but what’s the incentive?

 

[Bird]

13 minutes ago, revat said:

Not a bad idea.  But why would the mods want to do more work when they’re not the ones who messed up?  They certainly could be more considerate about it, but what’s the incentive?

 

I think that the general idea is that politeness is the incentive, and that is its' own reward. But I agree that it is generally too much work for the mods to go around seeing if they already messaged that particular seller and they do not police the sales threads per se, so just removing the threads is perhaps the best route. Besides, I will say it again, the rules are not that hard to follow.

[thehumantorch]

1 hour ago, revat said:

Not a bad idea.  But why would the mods want to do more work when they’re not the ones who messed up?  They certainly could be more considerate about it, but what’s the incentive?

 

Incentive?  Not a lot more work for the mods but it would save an awful lot of work by the OP.  It certainly won't work if the mods aren't interested in doing any work 

[skypinkblu]

6 hours ago, entalmighty1 said:

I agree with the sentiment, and I think I read somewhere that they used to do that.  I believe the current regime is looking to avoid long argumentative PM's over rule violations, so they just choose to yank them preemptively.

As long as I've been here, it's been done the same way. 

[skypinkblu]

5 minutes ago, thehumantorch said:

Incentive?  Not a lot more work for the mods but it would save an awful lot of work by the OP.  It certainly won't work if the mods aren't interested in doing any work 

I'm fairly certain that with the new software the pulled threads are visible to the OP, so they can just cut and paste. I don't think anyone else can see them.