ATTN: Tide, gumby, and the moderating team.

[AKLGT]

No, i'm saying it's buy/sell at your own risk if you don't research it. Just because FROOGLE tells me I found a good price, doesn't mean the vendor is the best. Just because NASIOC or LEGACYGT has a vendor that's new and I don't know anything about them, doesn't mean because I found them on the site, they MUST be ok to buy from. The issue we were discussing in this thread is about the expectations of Vendors to members and the lack of communication we seem to have with some of the larger ones. Just because JoeBlow member pays for a Vendor subscription does not immediately make him on the same caliber vendor status of a PDX Tuning or TurnInConcepts. I agree with RaGe that Josh should have told him the items were being DROP SHIPPED and were in fact NOT IN STOCK or in his hands. But to blame the site because of this? come on!

[GBY]

I'm happy to mediate on disputes between members and vendors via PM

[SBT]

its ok. you can say it. the moderating team is all alone on this one. no admin in this picture.

 

The Admins are involved - this has to be a team effort and know one exists in a vacuum.

 

RC - PM'd ya.

[LegGTLT]

No, i'm saying it's buy/sell at your own risk if you don't research it. Just because FROOGLE tells me I found a good price, doesn't mean the vendor is the best. Just because NASIOC or LEGACYGT has a vendor that's new and I don't know anything about them, doesn't mean because I found them on the site, they MUST be ok to buy from. The issue we were discussing in this thread is about the expectations of Vendors to members and the lack of communication we seem to have with some of the larger ones. Just because JoeBlow member pays for a Vendor subscription does not immediately make him on the same caliber vendor status of a PDX Tuning or TurnInConcepts. I agree with RaGe that Josh should have told him the items were being DROP SHIPPED and were in fact NOT IN STOCK or in his hands. But to blame the site because of this? come on!

Should the site be responsible for at LEAST looking at a vendors business to make sure they don't have a bad rep? I mean, minimal research at least? That sucks that a site would take on vendors with no research into their business and no care if they are reputable or not. I guess it's just a matter of the money?

[AKLGT]

well let me say this. i really do appreciate the fact that this is a discussion amongst the moderators. i really do. I do believe this time i caught the attention of the moderators in a positive way this time

 

but respectfully saying this, if i chose to sell something on here, and lied about it, i wouldnt expect anything less than some form of discipline. honestly. I am sure you can admit this yourselves. but moderating other members is alot easier than moderating vendors. This is what i dont really understand though. and not trying to turn this into something negative, but rather discussing this in a mature way, can someone explain this to me?

You are correct RaGe, it's much harder to police the Vendors when they are paying for their subscription, and yes more than the $25 donator amt. I know how much I pay for my vendor status on NASIOC, and I can assure you it's much more than that on a MONTHLY basis. There is no such thing as a perfect Vendor. They will make mistakes and sometimes, not be the best choice. Unfortunately, until there are several reports of bad sales, just like with members, we can give them warnings and infractions. AFAIK, there's really only been one vendor (twice) who we gave the kick out the door. We don't like seeing vendors rip off members because we are members too and we also spend our money with vendors on these forums. Perhaps some people forget that as well, but I know I spend a lot of money with our vendors here or on other sites so I don't like getting lied to or given the run around. You have to let us know when this happens so we can do our best to take care of it. But as you know, all we can do is put the pressure on them to get it delivered and make it right. Or come to a reasonable resolution that both parties are happy with.

 

So, if you guys have suggestions, then please share them with us. So far, SBT has really been pushing for some Vendor status/expectation reform and haven't seen too much from the Pnut farm. Let's hear what you guys want to see from our Vendors. Isn't this what this thread was intended for? How can we help hold Vendors accountable for their actions?

[RaGe]

well i wont lie about it, it really pissed me off. and i guess it was the straw that broke the camels back. i cant dispute that one bit. it jsut gets really old everytime i buy something on here, i get kicked right in the balls. I am not blaming the site for anything, i want to make that perfectly clear. I guess maybe my thinking of all of this is the following.

 

You would think making this site, you wanted to share a hobby and a passion, and unite other subaru legacy enthusiasts. It is not a vendor right to come on here and sell parts. it is nothing more than a privilege. And just like we have rules to follow if we want to sell things. ie, listed prices cuz this isnt ebay, but this does not apply to vendors. etc.... i thought that the members should have a little bit more respect than what we are given sometimes. You would just think that if a vendor comes on here and starts effn with members that tide himself would consider that a slap in his face. I also would have thought that he wouldnt want anyone on here giving his site a bad name and or giving this site a bad reputation.

 

now i understand that you moderators can only do so much too. i understand this. but why not use this thread as a building block and come up with the rules that vendors are to follow, as you guys are. but honestly i dont think stating if an item is in stock or not is really helping to what i am trying to achieve.

[AKLGT]

Should the site be responsible for at LEAST looking at a vendors business to make sure they don't have a bad rep? I mean, minimal research at least? That sucks that a site would take on vendors with no research into their business and no care if they are reputable or not. I guess it's just a matter of the money?

I can tell you, when I give NASIOC my $1000 a year, they don't ask me for references. No forum site will do that. If you want to sell something, you pay to do so. That's it. There are different level vendors on this site, so perhaps looking at what type of Vendor and looking for reviews is all you can do.

[Tide]

I'm really sorry you are having issues. If you need immediate admin/mod help for anything, please report the thread to start a mod discussion or PM any of us anytime, we're more than happy to help. I can't say that I read off topic daily, maybe once a week, so I don't recommend urgent or important issues being resolved in the off topic area.

 

That said this is already an ongoing discussion in the moderator forums. We've banned and/or removed vendor status from people plenty of times in the past regardless of what some members might think. And we are looking at both sides of any argument presented, but we don't just act without proper investigation.

[Tide]

Yeah, definitely open to suggestions to make Vendors stuff here better, but I don't believe honestly in "knee jerk management". One smelly egg doesn't mean the system is broken. But if there are simple easy ways to make improvements (more business details, etc), post them up.

 

ps - can I move this to site suggestions?

[LegGTLT]

Fair enough.

[RaGe]

and in which i dont blame you without getting the proper information. But, if there is a problem, rather than allowing a said vendor to keep selling goods/items, do you think a temp lockout ( not allowing them to sell anything else) until the problem in question is resolved?

 

and how about a time frame? if " X " amount of days go by without any communication from said vendor after a purchase, what could be done about that.

 

 

 

 

 

I understand you cant make a vendor give you a shipping number etc... thats why i ask if i will be provided with one. I also ask if items are in stock.

[Guest heightsgtltd]

In Tide's defense, it's hard to know ingoing whether a vendor is going to be bad unless there is a history of problems that is well known and documented. As he said, they have taken action against vendors in the past but that was for extreme situations.

 

Before it gets to that point, I feel like there should be some kind of warning or infraction given to vendors if they have not resolved an issue to the mods (impartial) satisfaction. This could be something that members could see and can influence whether or not they choose to spend their money with them.

 

It can keep the vendors honest too, as they know that there are repercussions for not doing the right thing and they want to make money on here.

 

They could also expire much like warnings for members do, and if a certain number was exceeded, it could result in a temporary or permanent termination of vendor privileges.

 

Obviously Tide and the site get income from vendors, but the members are the ones who will or will not frequent vendors which is the only reason they pay for vendor status.

[AKLGT]

well i wont lie about it, it really pissed me off. and i guess it was the straw that broke the camels back. i cant dispute that one bit. it jsut gets really old everytime i buy something on here, i get kicked right in the balls. I am not blaming the site for anything, i want to make that perfectly clear. I guess maybe my thinking of all of this is the following.

 

You would think making this site, you wanted to share a hobby and a passion, and unite other subaru legacy enthusiasts. It is not a vendor right to come on here and sell parts. it is nothing more than a privilege. And just like we have rules to follow if we want to sell things. ie, listed prices cuz this isnt ebay, but this does not apply to vendors. etc.... i thought that the members should have a little bit more respect than what we are given sometimes. You would just think that if a vendor comes on here and starts effn with members that tide himself would consider that a slap in his face. I also would have thought that he wouldnt want anyone on here giving his site a bad name and or giving this site a bad reputation.

 

now i understand that you moderators can only do so much too. i understand this. but why not use this thread as a building block and come up with the rules that vendors are to follow, as you guys are. but honestly i dont think stating if an item is in stock or not is really helping to what i am trying to achieve.

RaGe, I think you have the worst luck when it comes to buying anything from a member or a Vendor! If something is going to go wrong, it does, even if it is perfect the 1000 times before, you end up with that 1001 time that goes bad.

 

and yes, as I stated before, I think you have every right to be pissed. All of this would have been avoided if you were told the item would be drop shipped, not IN STOCK. Regardless, even if it hadn't, these issues would come up sooner or later. Sorry, you had to be the one dealing with it all to bring it to light.

[Tide]

Honestly we (and when I say we, its usually an unthanked mod) usually work behind the scenes with vendors/members directly, its pretty rare that stuff blow up in public and without a mod team like there is here, things would be alot worse. These guys are great.

[AKLGT]

and in which i dont blame you without getting the proper information. But, if there is a problem, rather than allowing a said vendor to keep selling goods/items, do you think a temp lockout ( not allowing them to sell anything else) until the problem in question is resolved?

 

and how about a time frame? if " X " amount of days go by without any communication from said vendor after a purchase, what could be done about that.

 

 

 

 

 

I understand you cant make a vendor give you a shipping number etc... thats why i ask if i will be provided with one. I also ask if items are in stock.

Those are great ideas. That's exactly what we're needing. What do you think is acceptable time frames for responses? I know even on Ebay, if I buy something, the seller states they usually ship within x amt of days from receipt of payment. obviously weekends are hard, but 2-3 bus days should be adaquate unless otherwise stated?

 

*edit* as for not allowing a vendor to sell anything if there is a dispute, I don't know if that is reasonable, especially on a first offense. I've seen some members get upset over silly things and to prevent a vendor from selling entirely because one member of 1000 others who went perfect, would not be right. Perhaps if we can put them on a probation period for new vendors, that would help. we also have to rely on members to report any issues with vendors so we can see it. there are a lot of smaller vendors on here.

[Guest heightsgtltd]

 

and yes, as I stated before, I think you have every right to be pissed. All of this would have been avoided if you were told the item would be drop shipped, not IN STOCK.

 

^^^ exactly.

A warning could be given for that. Maybe when a vendor comes on, whatever you guys come up with can be added to the boilerplate so they know in advance that if they pull funny stuff, there are consequences and that may keep them on the straight and narrow.

[Tide]

Vendor code of conduct? Could probably put something together.

[RaGe]

well like heights said

 

( and i am mature enough to put the transaction that took place with me and the said vendor behind me and move on to try and fix things )

 

but making the vendor accountable for what they say. If its one other thing i have learned it is this. i will no longer place orders over the telephone, because the conversation is not ducumented unless i record it. i will in the future ask right on the board, if i will be given a tracking number, and if the item is in stock ( can you touch it ). that way it will alow the moderating team to respond to it better than just taking someones word for it.

 

But just like we get points etc... if a vendor fails to provide the service he/she has publicly or privatly written, then yes i think some form of reprecussion/discipline should be taken.

 

as far as how many days before an item ships? i think that should be established at the time of the sale and or unless both parties reach an agreement.

[RaGe]

^^^ exactly.

A warning could be given for that. .

 

yes it could have. but honestly i dont think it would be the right thing to do now. i think i will chalk this one, but in the future this should be implemented.

[coxx]

Vendor code of conduct? Could probably put something together.

There ya go bro, great idea! Something where if the vendor is found to have lied to a customer on the board (like in Rages recent case) they're prevented from conducting business on the site for a certain amount of time.

[AKLGT]

Vendor code of conduct? Could probably put something together.

I think that's in order. We need to have set rules and hold them accountable for what they promise and deliver. This way, everyone will know what should be expected. I also think SBT's idea for each vendor to state a HOW THEY DO BUSINESS thread would be good in the Vendor Classifieds area.

 

In RaGe's case, if it had been a member (thinking of one that recently happened) who stated wrong info or misrepresented an item, we would have given them an infraction and possibly a time out depending on severity. We really should hold our Vendors accountable.

[RaGe]

yes. i think the idea of SBT is great. and in my case, i was asking about a gauge, i could have just wrote right on that thread, hey do you have this in stock. so that way the answer is documented.

[mccorry]

Moving to Site Suggestions per request.....

[Guest heightsgtltd]

Vendor code of conduct? Could probably put something together.

 

I just assumed that there was one but yeah

 

Rage, I wasn't suggesting that the vendor in question get a warning necessarily this time, but moving forward

[RaGe]

i know. just wanted to state that for the record.