[Updated Rule Change] PayPal G&S Recommended

[TheStig]

YFG was a bad situation for sure.
Its a shame that he is still having an impact on this forum.

If things stay as they are, I suspect this forum will be pretty much gone within a couple of years as sellers move to other platforms, as @Walter Langkowski feelings on this forum are probably becoming more widespread with other members.

I very much doubt your statement.
O-F it will always exist only some sellers will go.
Which I personally don't mind at all.
As far as I'm concerned, any member who is only here for the exchange can leave.

 

[Atticus]

I very much doubt your statement.
O-F it will always exist only some sellers will go.
Which I personally don't mind at all.
As far as I'm concerned, any member who is only here for the exchange can leave.

The vast majority of the people on this forum are here to buy and sell Oakley products. Some come just for information to sell only, and those people usually come and go like a fart in the wind. The long term members almost all buy, try and then sell just for fun, which is where this US 1099 issue has such a negative impact.
Not sure if Germany has something like this, but I hope you can see where folks form the US are coming from here. This 1099 is counted as income, as if we are making 100% profit if we sell a pair of R1s for $650, but had paid $650 2 years ago. I know people will say to write that initial cost off, but I do not know that anyone is comfortable using past PP transactions as a "receipt".

 

[TheStig]

The vast majority of the people on this forum are here to buy and sell Oakley products. Some come just for information to sell only, and those people usually come and go like a fart in the wind. The long term members almost all buy, try and then sell just for fun, which is where this US 1099 issue has such a negative impact.
Not sure if Germany has something like this, but I hope you can see where folks form the US are coming from here. This 1099 is counted as income, as if we are making 100% profit if we sell a pair of R1s for $650, but had paid $650 2 years ago. I know people will say to write that initial cost off, but I do not know that anyone is comfortable using past PP transactions as a "receipt".

I fully understood the Issue.
As of today Germany does not have a Taxation like that.
Yes, members buy and sell as well as being helpful and contribute to the O-F community.
But like @OakleyBoss tried to explain. He hates to be in the middle of a F&F deal that has gone sour.
To him it makes no different how you go about a deal as long as it does not impact OF as whole.

OF should be a exchange of Information and fun not a sales site.

 

[Walter Langkowski]

YFG was a bad situation for sure.
Its a shame that he is still having an impact on this forum.

If things stay as they are, I suspect this forum will be pretty much gone within a couple of years as sellers move to other platforms, as @Walter Langkowski feelings on this forum are probably becoming more widespread with other members.

I’m sure alot of people had his address but no one wanted to go to Japan to do anything about it, that’s not the case for US sellers I’m always looking for an excuse to take my Vette for a road trip…. That being said, steer clear of new members, anyone using a PO Box, anyone in a foreign country or anyone in Commiefornia for that matter because they don’t understand that out here in the real world you’re not in a little snowflake safe space/ protection bubble and your a$$ better be able to cash the checks your write with you mouth. If I’m paying F&F I do my research and try to make sure they live in one of the 39 states of reciprocity incase anything goes sideways, and if things seem a little off it’s best to just mail them a money order and don’t write it to cash make sure you use their name and then do your due diligence and match their name with their address look into them a little. If it’s for a large amount of money ask for a picture of their ID.

 

[cacatman]

I don't think O.F. should be mandating methods of payment, but I do think we need to be stricter (with suspensions, bans or even warnings in their signature) when taking action on people not following through on a deal. Historically, we take a stronger stance on one time spammers/bots, than we do on people who actually rip other people off real money. I think this is wrong.

If it can be proven that the seller cheated the buyer, then I think the seller should be banned (from O.F., or the exchange areas), regardless of the transaction type, be it F & F, G & S, bank transfer or venmo.

The only difference in the scenario is that the method of payment will determine if the buyer loses his money or not. Method of payment shouldn't determine whether the thief is punished or not.

O.F. can make recommendations for how best to protect oneself in a sale, but in the end it's up to two consenting adults to decide on the risks they are willing to take.

P.S. I know the argument has been that admin shouldn't adjudicate because they won't get it right 100% of the time. So what? It's not like an O.F. member is on death row where the burden of proof rightly should obviously be higher. Heck, I'd settle on being 90% right if I could stop another person from getting ripped off.

 

[Atticus]

I don't think O.F. should be mandating methods of payment, but I do think we need to be stricter (with suspensions, bans or even warnings in their signature) when taking action on people not following through on a deal. Historically, we take a stronger stance on one time spammers/bots, than we do on people who actually rip other people off real money. I think this is wrong.

If it can be proven that the seller cheated the buyer, then I think the seller should be banned (from O.F., or the exchange areas), regardless of the transaction type, be it F & F, G & S, bank transfer or venmo.

The only difference in the scenario is that the method of payment will determine if the buyer loses his money or not. Method of payment shouldn't determine whether the thief is punished or not.

O.F. can make recommendations for how best to protect oneself in a sale, but in the end it's up to two adult consenting adults to decide on the risks they are willing to take.

P.S. I know the argument has been that admin shouldn't adjudicate because they won't get it right 100% of the time. So what? It's not like an O.F. member is on death row where the burden of proof rightly should obviously be higher. Heck, I'd settle on being 90% right if I could stop another person from getting ripped off.

I wonder if limiting the number of sale ads may be helpful to allow someone that goes rogue, like YFG, time enough for the scam to become apparent?

 

[cacatman]

I wonder if limiting the number of sale ads may be helpful to allow someone that goes rogue, like YFG, time enough for the scam to become apparent?

No. I still don't think that's harsh enough. It should be "one strike and you're out" (if it's clearly a "bait and switch", triangle scam, non post of item) and suspension until it has been adjudicated. If there's a full refund, there should be a warning and a suspension, rather than ban. If the buyer doesn't get their money back, it should be an immediate ban (in my book).

My case is, that most thieves don't do it 100% of the time. They just do it occasionally so that some people can vouch for them. Few "go for gold" like YFG did.

 

[Atticus]

No. I still don't think that's harsh enough. It should be "one strike and you're out" (if it's clearly a "bait and switch", triangle scam, non post of item) and suspension until it has been adjudicated. If there's a full refund, there should be a warning and a suspension, rather than ban. If the buyer doesn't get their money back, it should be an immediate ban (in my book).

Sorry, I was unclear in what I wrote. I was wondering if limiting everyone to say one or two active sale ads would help flush out a scammer like YFG quicker...Int hat scenario, he sold quite a few items and it took awhile for someone to finally speak up. if he could only sell one item at a time, would less people have been impacted?
I agree that bans should be more readily handed out when there is good proof that someone is not selling reputably.

 

[cacatman]

Sorry, I was unclear in what I wrote. I was wondering if limiting everyone to say one or two active sale ads would help flush out a scammer like YFG quicker...Int hat scenario, he sold quite a few items and it took awhile for someone to finally speak up. if he could only sell one item at a time, would less people have been impacted?
I agree that bans should be more readily handed out when there is good proof that someone is not selling reputably.

Ah, sorry, misunderstood what you were trying to say. Maybe there should be a limit on sale items (like max book loans from a library) but then, I think that's hard to regulate e.g. multiple items in same listing etc. Also, I'd be loathe to restrict people like @X-Metal Beast.

Ironically, I can see that taking a hard line on thieves might actually make them do multiple listings, in order to make their ban worthwhile.

It may be a bit too sophisticated for what this website can do, but it would be good if buyers could mark a seller as having received payment (with item still pending) which then cancels when the item is physically received (e.g. triggered by feedback being left for seller), so that potential buyers could see how many outstanding items have yet to be received by other buyers.

 

[Atticus]

Ah, sorry, misunderstood what you were trying to say. Maybe there should be a limit on sale items (like max book loans from a library) but then, I think that's hard to regulate e.g. multiple items in same listing etc. Also, I'd be loathe to restrict people like @X-Metal Beast.

Ironically, I can see that taking a hard line on thieves might actually make them do multiple listings, in order to make their ban worthwhile.

It may be a bit too sophisticated for what this website can do, but it would be good if buyers could mark a seller as having received payment (with item still pending) which then cancels when the item is physically received (e.g. triggered by feedback being left for seller), so that prospective sellers could see how many outstanding items have yet to be received by buyers.

That would be a great system. It would be cool if it could be right in the feedback section. If a seller has 10 outstanding sales, it may be prudent to hold off a bit on a purchase...hmmm.