Reinvention of 'Pay It Forward' Thread 1 1

[JAM_NYC]

2 minutes ago, MetalPSI™ said:

The donkey's is what kept myself and a lot of others from participating. I can see the same old same old happening if it revived. Human nature and all that

True, but they hid behind the concept of "no discussion of value allowed", and that allowed the "it's the best I can offer" crowd to run amok. With @NamesJay proposed rule of value levels, that wouldn't be allowed. Take $100 worth of books and offer up quarter bin rubbish? Not allowed anymore. I'm sure that won't stop people from trying. And I'll be there to laugh at the fallout.

[MetalPSI]

Just now, JAM_NYC said:

True, but they hid behind the concept of "no discussion of value allowed", and that allowed the "it's the best I can offer" crowd to run amok. With @NamesJay proposed rule of value levels, that wouldn't be allowed. Take $100 worth of books and offer up quarter bin rubbish? Not allowed anymore. I'm sure that won't stop people from trying. And I'll be there to laugh at the fallout.

Yeah but the flipside of that is that someone is bound to post something expensive and no one will be willing or able to counter. I'm all for the laughs, but at the end of  the day, this won't benefit the community

[JAM_NYC]

1 minute ago, MetalPSI™ said:

 

3 minutes ago, JAM_NYC said:

True, but they hid behind the concept of "no discussion of value allowed", and that allowed the "it's the best I can offer" crowd to run amok. With @NamesJay proposed rule of value levels, that wouldn't be allowed. Take $100 worth of books and offer up quarter bin rubbish? Not allowed anymore. I'm sure that won't stop people from trying. And I'll be there to laugh at the fallout.

Yeah but the flipside of that is that someone is bound to post something expensive and no one will be willing or able to counter. I'm all for the laughs, but at the end of  the day, this won't benefit the community

 

Yeah, that could happen. But I guess the offer would just revert back to the previous offer like it did last time.

For all the krap the PIF got, from me included, there were way more generous offers than drek. And it was a relatively lively thread. Considering how dead this place is since the switch over, it couldn't hurt to bring it back. 

[MetalPSI]

Just now, JAM_NYC said:

Yeah, that could happen. But I guess the offer would just revert back to the previous offer like it did last time.

For all the krap the PIF got, from me included, there were way more generous offers than drek. And it was a relatively lively thread. Considering how dead this place is since the switch over, it couldn't hurt to bring it back. 

It's true, it won't hurt to try this, or anything really, to try to revitalize this forum.

[kav]

7 minutes ago, MetalPSI™ said:

Yeah but the flipside of that is that someone is bound to post something expensive and no one will be willing or able to counter. I'm all for the laughs, but at the end of  the day, this won't benefit the community

what would benefit the community?

[Logan510]

Just now, kav said:

what would benefit the community?

I can think of a few things 

[Get Marwood & I]

1 minute ago, kav said:

what would benefit the community?

Pride.

[porcupine48]

in the name of love.

 

[fastballspecial]

3 hours ago, 1Cool said:

 

3 hours ago, crassus said:

Thanks guys for the very clear summary, my other question is about remedies, everything gets infected with people who abuse or play the system, why couldn't this system compensate for, or work around the abusers?

The Pay it Forward thread spawned the Giving Tree thread which was suppose to correct all the issues but it turned out to be an even bigger headache (especially for the admin).  Veto power, revert back to the last offer, people working together to thwart the rules.  It became a full time job to keep track of it all.  All for a thread meant to bring good will to board members

 

I agree it was nothing, but a headache and really made me look at some boardies a different way after what I was seeing.

[JAM_NYC]

18 minutes ago, HarveySwick said:

I think those who repeatedly attempted to silence objectors who criticized donkeys were worse than the actual donkeys.

Amen to that. 

[BlowUpTheMoon]

2 hours ago, Foley said:

When you create a new topic, the "poll" tab is next to "Content" at the top.

Thank you!

[UnboxingTreasures]

Well right now more people think the idea should be kaboshed, but that doesn't necessarily mean the PIF shouldn't be revived at all...

I'd like people to chime in on the Tier structure I mentioned on top of the thread -- or suggestions on a  new implementation of the PIF thread.

Would it even be worth it to restrict it to CGC graded comic books? Will there be a large enough market to entertain that possibility?

Edited March 16, 2017 by NamesJay

[Bird]

 

 

 

 

[Bird]

 

[crassus]

This is a comment about your tier structure, not necessarily a criticism, but you posted the following as an example:

2) Tier structure:

Bronze - $1 - $50 book

Silver - $50 - $100 book

Gold - $100 - $200 book

Platinum - $200 - $500 book

Assuming this is restricted to CGC slabs, I'm not sure what these values represent. Any given SA slab of any interest is likely going to exceed that $50 to $100 range on everything but the lowest drek. I would think the same for Gold, for the most part, but would a desirable CGC menu not need to assume higher values?

 

[Shadow Images]

CGC only slab will kill it before it began. Too many people don't collect CGC.

[UnboxingTreasures]

18 minutes ago, crassus said:

This is a comment about your tier structure, not necessarily a criticism, but you posted the following as an example:

2) Tier structure:

Bronze - $1 - $50 book

Silver - $50 - $100 book

Gold - $100 - $200 book

Platinum - $200 - $500 book

Assuming this is restricted to CGC slabs, I'm not sure what these values represent. Any given SA slab of any interest is likely going to exceed that $50 to $100 range on everything but the lowest drek. I would think the same for Gold, for the most part, but would a desirable CGC menu not need to assume higher values?

 

The Tier names aren't meant to indicate a period of publications. The tier's could have just as easily been labeled Red, Green, Blue and Yellow.

And the more I think about it making it CGC only really would filter out a large part of the audience.

Let's have the brainstorming begin on the best way to implement a new PIF thread :-)

[crassus]

3 minutes ago, NamesJay said:

The Tier names aren't meant to indicate a period of publications. The tier's could have just as easily been labeled Red, Green, Blue and Yellow.

And the more I think about it making it CGC only really would filter out a large part of the audience.

Let's have the brainstorming begin on the best way to implement a new PIF thread :-)

Ok got it, my mistake, when I saw Bronze, Silver etc my OCD kicked in...its one of the reasons I can never get into watching the Olympics...I'm always disappointed... 

So how do you see these tiers of value working to reduce conflict over equivalency? Is this what you intended with these tiers?

[kav]

Yep if it's slabs only i won't participate and no one wants to see that.

[HarveySwick]

The same few donkeys will continuously jump in and claim a $110 CGC book and offer up a $40 CGC book that one time had a high sale four years ago of $55. And then they'll claim "that's all I have to offer.  And it's in the same tier." Others will chime in that the entire thread is about paying it forward and give the poor guy a break and the negativity is why people refuse to participate in the thread.  Then the thread will die down and become stagnant because no one will want the $40 book. Then people will get upset. Names will be called. Parents will spit at participants coming back from wars. Pets heads will fall off. 

But yeah, definitely, sounds like a great idea. Start it up.