Trades ~

[Jon]

pms asking people to trade are not allowed, send them my way and ill get it sorted

[Amanda]

It is true that the network owners are under no obligation at all to help out with trades like this, but I think the steps you're taking will be very helpful to us. I hope this will ultimately help the free sites as well since the free sites will be seen as more legitimate (we know they are but most people think it's all a scam). Tab does indeed have a point but the difference between paying your neighbour and a trade here on a forum is that this is that the evidence for this trade is here for all to see. Ultimately, as a network owner you have the choice to stay out of it or to weigh up the evidence and make an informed judgement and I would hope you would all be willing to put someone on hold given enough evidence against them.

As for the "confirmed green" idea, when greens are withdrawn as far as I know it's not because the offer hasn't been properly completed, as the green wouldn't have been given in the first place if this was the case. Greens are usually withdrawn because the member has behaved in a way that contravenes the site's terms and conditions, such as creating another account or spamming their link. Unfortunately it's simply impossible to predict whether this will happen so there can't be such a thing as a "confirmed green" that can't be retracted.

[Bazza]

I like the idea of putting links in the trades system, glad nothing has to be done via pm. but what about when detailed complications need to be expained, for instance i recently had to make a phonecall to get my green sorted, should we post all info on our progress in the trades system for anyone to see?

[Amanda]

I would, if you post everything at the time it happens then it's there for us all to see should there be any arguments later. Whenever I've taken time to go green I've posted updates about what I've done about it and when. A quick post only takes a second, and in the trades system it doesn't clutter the forum.

[Usualwill]

Any more thoughts on this topic Woostar, or indeed the exceem admin?

[woostar]

Aye ~ is something we're still discussing. Will make a post soon.

W.>

[Jon]

Originally Posted by Usualwill

Any more thoughts on this topic Woostar, or indeed the exceem admin?

I think the main issue is the fact that a few members who have had the unfortunate experience of trades going wrong have gone directly to the network owners in a attempt to resolve this, rather than speak to myself or one of the other mods (as it is instructed in the rules) Quite simply its not down to the network owners to resolve trades, anyone that does attempt to scam people (well we pass on their refferal link) gets reported to the networks, what the networks in turn do with that infomation is down to them.

[eamonn]

Trades happen on more sites than exceem Woo.
So fundementally you'll never be able to stop trades, even if 90% of them turn to be fraudulent.
The trade blackmarket would turn into a big scene!

[woostar]

LOL @ 'The trade blackmarket' ~ can I be the mafia boss
Don't worry eamonn, not gonna stop it ~ just kick it in the right direction. Think if guidelines are provided and ppl ignore them you have no one other than yourself to blame when dodgy trades get put on hold.

W.>

[biggad]

Whoever has lowest feedback goes first in my case.

to be honest i don't expect anything from the site owners. after all it isn't their problem and there could easily be a case for both trader and tradee. If in doubt don't do anything with untrustworthy people.

AND USE THE FEEDBACK SYSTEM!!!

[eamonn]

Originally Posted by biggad

Whoever has lowest feedback goes first in my case.

AND USE THE FEEDBACK SYSTEM!!!

I totally agree with that, as theoretically speaking, you can trust the person with a high feedback.
However, if they have a recent run of negatives I would be worried!

[CaptainCave]

Ok i know i'm late in adding to this but here yu go my points.

1. With the trading system as it currently is as soon as you have accepted a trade with someone you are no longer able to add to that trade so if for instance.
johnny starts a trade.
Jane answers said trade.
johnny decides to go ahead with it and clicks the trade with this person button. everytime johnny or jane then access that particular trade thread it goes straigt to the feedback section.
Problems arise when the conversation can no longer be displayed to public view. from this point on anyy communications will be sent via PM as Johnny or Jane cannot reply to the already started trade thread. starting a new trade thread is also complicated, with the old system once a trade was agreed an new thread would be started in the trades in progress section so updates could be added all the time. Enabling everything to be kept in public view and it was obvious who was having problems with who.

am i rambling again
2. I agree with the higher trade ideas of the lowest value going first. although its then extremly unnerving for newer members to trade as thats where the scamming could start. with two 0 traders going together. I know its bizarre but maybe say if you are 0-3 trade/feedback rating you cannot start trades you can only answer trades G4G or G4Cash. And then once you have a +3 on your account you can start asking for trades. If that makes sense.

If i've made any nonsense posting in that i appologise i tend to try to say to much in one pieca and get confused

[bmh16]

Only just read this post. But, hey, here is my suggestion:

Why not put a restriction of what members can trade. Say people under 50 posts have to ask special permission to trade, and if its a trade with a reptible member (over 50/100 posts) they (the member under 50 posts) has to go green first.

Ben

[Bazza]

posts arent a very reliable thing to go by, take discodjchris for example, he held the record for highest posts on exceem before jon, and look what happened.

[Amanda]

We've discussed things like this in the past and, as Bazza says, there's no reliable way to do it so that's why we've ended up agreeing that both members go green at the same time. Trade feedback isn't necessarily the only way as some older and more reliable members don't trade often (for example I've never seen Zara trade and it's very rare the admin do!). Post count is also no good really. The feedback is valuable to help you make an informed decision about a member, and obviously negative feedback speaks volumes.

I don't mean to dismiss what you're saying, we're always open to new ideas and discussion like this can bring up some really good ones!

[bmh16]

what happened to discodjchris then? Why was he banned? He is in my msn simehw but haven't talked wiv him 4 ages

[Usualwill]

Interested to see where this discussion goes.

Having recently been scammed twice myself (once by an exceem mod!) I can see that there are no easy answers.
I understand the network owners difficulties on this topic but I do think that there needs to be an appreciation that trading goes on and will continue to do so. Indeed I would go so far as to say that a large portion of the networks pyramid of referrals and continued revenue is built from trading. When trades go wrong its ultimately the genuine trader who is the real victim. If its a genuine scam and no offer was completed then the trader has to accept that there is nothing that can be done by the network - thats why we need the trading networks help in creating somewhere we genuine traders are protected as much as possible.
However, in the case of duplicate account scammers, often the offer was completed successfully and therefore the network would have received the revenue from that offer. In that case maybe there is an argument for allowing the referrer to still receive their credit, but whilst putting the scammers account on hold. The networks still get their money so its very easy for them to say "no credits given" - they still get their buck at the end of the day right?!? But maybe there needs to be more appreciation and thought towards their genuine customers who are working hard to get referrals and keep their revenue stream going - after all we too are victims here.
This all sounds very anti network owners and it's really not meant to be. I very much appreciate the time and effort they put into running these networks and recognise that there are no easy answers - I just wish we could find some middle ground.

[sam51289]

Having recently been scammed twice myself (once by an exceem mod!)[/quote]

You were scammed by an exceem mod? Who? I find this hard to believe!

[Bazza]

sounds like it could have been a mod that is very inactive nowadays.

[sam51289]

Rogerdodger is inactive, Brierly is no longer a mod and Trev never seems to post on here anymore. I dont think trevoe ever traded though so it cant be him.