Auction Participation Prerequisites? (Closed!)

[Bun]

I understand the desire to protect those who are already here, but when I think about other suggestions for what I think would be fair and a better option, I can't think of any because my answer is still no prerequisites. We're all adults here. We should all be educated about how to use PayPal to keep ourselves safe. Buying / selling online will always be a risk and I'm of the opinion that people shouldn't be treated like scammers until they give a reason to be treated that way.

i definitely agree! adults should be able to fend for themselves, mods are just here to help guide, stop any fuss, and move things around lol but unfortunately other bidders cant protect themselves from people artificially bumping bids. i understand your point of view for other DM rules, but I'm not quite sure it applies to this particular topic about the rules. Still it's your opinion!

My question with this one is where will these vouches be requested? I've been in this community long enough to see drama... People who dislike each other... This could work, but also could be extra drama. Maybe I'm jaded and cynical. I also wonder about those who are not scammers but who may be new, shy, too busy / no desire to participate in the community / etc. What if they would like to participate but for whatever non nefarious reason don't have anyone to vouch for them?

Vouches would be requested to be gathered by a mod of the persons choice, just like the proving a bid. Personally, I think this is the only method that will work to prevent this issue as well. i wholeheartedly agreed with your points about how the other options are basically useless. unfortunately, i came up with the base ideas myself and that seems to be more popular than the one the community helped formulate that is better. still, im not going to enforce a rule that is so theoretical like this if people don't want it.

Is the rule that requires proof of every bid still in effect? If that's the case, everything I just wrote may be pointless in regards to my own participation as I find that rule an invasion of participant's privacy and is exactly the kind of micromanagement I'm not a fan of. I also dislike the rule of limiting auctions only to DM. Again, narrows one's audience and is unnecessarily accusatory. But perhaps now I'm off topic...

that is still in effect only for silent bids. there are public and silent bids. public ones, no one needs to worry, they just comment and that's their bid! its been the most popular choice and they've gone without a hitch so far.

I definitely understand the upset with limiting the bids to just DM members, especially with your point of view that adults shouldn't have to be micromanaged and i vvholeheartledly agree. i wish it wasn't necessary, but i just don't share the view point that i should let people who aren't vvise enough or haven't seen hovv scammers act before, or vvho accidentally made a poor error in judgement suffer when i can do something to prevent or help. it's like, i wouldn't be able to be happy with myself as a person if i didn't do the best i could, especially after seeing hovv negligent the reddit mods are in times of need because they feel like adults can sort themselves and especially vvith hovv DH used to be as well.. theres enough alternatives that have caused unsafe environments and DM is the different alternative. just like people like having discord, reddit, and forums, theres a variety for everyone, but luckily its not limited and everyone can participate in everything.

to clarify vvhy silent bids have to verified is to prevent artificial inflation. People are able to bid anonymously if that's the option given, if the auctioneer feels like they prefer to give bidders more privacy, but unfortunately, other bidders can't do anything to prevent artificial inflation. this isn't a situation where because you're an old enough adult, you can some hovv tell if its being artificially inflated. It's just making sure the auctions stay fair. It's cool if you still see that as an invasion of privacy, but i think that its more important to not scam people than it is for someone to tell us vvho is bidding to just one mod.

 

[Eilalae]

I am not specifically advocating a 90-day period: my point is that a newcomer can reasonably expect a limitation on their ability to sit down at the high roller table. I think a somewhat protectionist stance is not only excusable but prudent.

I really like this comment. I’ve been trying to think of something to add, but I’m not sure what I want to say.

 

[Bun]

Again, narrows one's audience and is unnecessarily accusatory. But perhaps now I'm off topic...

i forgot i wanted to respond to this part in particular as well. i definitely agree it narrows the audience and unfortunately even more since i don't think vve can advertise on reddit about it either, but at the same time, due to not being able to advertise it on reddit anymore makes it a whole lot of a less big deal since there's not many other places to advertise this anyway so the majority of people who are going to bid are people who are already here.

i also agree and apologize for hovv unnecessarily accusatory it is. Like, i never thought about it that way, but i never meant to make anyone feel like i'm eyeing everyone down for potentially being a scammer. it's just RR's are clearly a very sensitive topic and even on reddit people were saying they hoped RR owners get scammed and people were talking about spite bidding and shit.. its just a mess.. i'm really just trying my best and i really hope you can see that and at least be understanding about why i am doing what i am even if you don't agree. I wish i could make everyone happy, but that compromises the whole rules thing.

 

[Bun]

I really like this comment. I’ve been trying to think of something to add, but I’m not sure what I want to say.

i totally missed this comment of skunkies! I definitely get the point of view that it sucks to be limited at all, but its true, its the nature of life in general and most people have to wait naturally to get an RR from drops and stuff anyway, its sorta kinda similar to just the natural nature of dildos and acquiring an RR.

 

[hoard-indeed]

I will be honest—I had no idea feedback was a thing until this poll. Which means I just left feedback that I should have have a year ago...

That being said, I like the idea of this restriction forcing users to leave feedback.

I know we all have peaks and valleys of forum engagement, and I personally would be hesistant to buy/sell to a username I didn’t recognize. But if I saw they had feedback vouching for them, I would be more inclined.

I like the 10 comments idea, as long as there was some quality control (outside of just counting). Does that mean reviewing the comments to ensure it’s not just spam? Is that even possible?

 

[Bun]

I like the 10 comments idea, as long as there was some quality control (outside of just counting). Does that mean reviewing the comments to ensure it’s not just spam? Is that even possible?

not really. thats vvhy its only a good idea in theory and not in practice. its easily cheesable and ends in them just vvasting a minute of their life. doesn't prevent anything in practice unfortunately.

 

[hoard-indeed]

not really. thats vvhy its only a good idea in theory and not in practice. its easily cheesable and ends in them just vvasting a minute of their life. doesn't prevent anything in practice unfortunately.

Okay, this might be super unpopular then but I would be more inclined to be stricter. Like, accounts need to be at least a month old, or require feedback.

I know it’s a bit unfair (heck, I don’t even meet the feedback quota) but I feel like if people are only joining this forum to auction and then leave, I don’t mind if they find it a bit unfair.

People who want to be here for more than the auctions will put in the time to do so, and eventually will qualify.

 

[Bun]

Okay, this might be super unpopular then but I would be more inclined to be stricter. Like, accounts need to be at least a month old, or require feedback.

I know it’s a bit unfair (heck, I don’t even meet the feedback quota) but I feel like if people are only joining this forum to auction and then leave, I don’t mind if they find it a bit unfair.

People who want to be here for more than the auctions will put in the time to do so, and eventually will qualify.

Except the vouching option also makes it so community members who haven't bought so much but have still been around for awhile don't get punished by it. It's just a small gate for new people

 

[grey-daze]

tbh i'd only feel like asking people for vouches if they aren't already an established member of the community. auctions last for at least a vveek and so they have time to talk to me or any staff member about them.

I appreciate the clarification on what your approach might be for vouches. I have another question that I don't believe has been specifically addressed:
If the only prerequisite for auctions is an account older than one week (currently the leading option), could an auctioneer choose to restrict an auction further if they wish (based on feedback or similar)?

I think as a potential bidder, I can work with few/no restrictions, because I'm inclined to look at the profiles of the auctioneer and other bidders for red flags before making the decision to bid. It's not perfect, but it's easy for me to abstain from an auction if something doesn't seem right.

As a potential auctioneer, I would be inclined to have some restrictions. I'm a little uncertain exactly what restrictions would make me most comfortable, but it would probably be something like feedback or forum posts or Discord activity. All of these are totally great ways to show involvement in the community. I don't like the idea of selling to someone I don't trust, but I would be too nervous about the potential backlash to cancel an auction. The easiest way to reconcile that conflict is to have some indicator that trustworthy individuals are the only ones making bids. Personally, I would be okay with having a smaller audience and making a little less money in order to have that peace of mind.

 

[Voyette]

I'm really not clear what the object of limitations is. Is it solely to make sure people don't get scammed? It seems like this could easily be avoided with a third-party mediator (more work for the mediator, but better outcome). Is it to make sure that the people involved in the auction are upstanding and contributing members of the community? Then it seems like a week isn't nearly long enough. Post total only makes sense if you want people shit-posting. Feedback only makes sense of you want to limit transactions to people who have bought and/or sold here before (and have gotten feedback. I've made at least 5 separate successful transactions here, but have no feedback).

 

[sugarbunny]

Allowing the same freedom here that apparently made reddit so easy to sell and eventually get scammed on, yet expecting different results, seems unlikely.

As I've never been scammed on reddit and primarily, the majority of people I know have not been scammed on reddit, so I'm not personally worried about it. I have never been concerned about bid inflation, either, and I honestly had never heard about this until DM. Is that really a thing? Is it that the seller artificially inflates it in attempts to get more money (but also out bids most participants, probably)? A buyer supposedly artificially inflates it to knock out other participants? How exactly does this happen and has it actually happened? Is there proof?

Now, I know just because I've never been scammed on reddit and primarily have not heard of many others being scammed doesn't mean it doesn't happen but... I think if I do think about the times I've heard of scams, it's been from someone not sending to the address on PayPal, or a trade with someone they don't know / didn't send money / an invoice for the exchange. I can think of the one scammer from the BD forums who made regular attempts, but I wonder if there are others who are consistent or not.

So, long story short, I'm not worried about the lack of prerequisites for auctions. I would say maybe that's just me, but I'm actually surprised to see my post liked given the results of the poll currently.

Normally I wouldn't get myself involved in something like this, but I actually have multiple RRs I was considering auctioning (from years ago drops, not recent) and without reddit, I'm a bit salty at the lack of good places to auction things. Seems like the options are either pick here or DH and Discord. They both seem a bit limiting in audiences and I'd naturally have the largest audience possible not only for myself but also to allow everyone a chance.

 

[Skunkie]

...and I'm of the opinion that people shouldn't be treated like scammers until they give a reason to be treated that way.

I do agree, and yet stores still insist on having policies, cameras, and other electronic means for loss prevention.
I personally take umbrage at having to leave my backpack at the front desk, but I support the business's right to enact policies as they see fit, and if I disagree, I don't shop there.

 

[Phelvia]

As I've never been scammed on reddit and primarily, the majority of people I know have not been scammed on reddit, so I'm not personally worried about it. I have never been concerned about bid inflation, either, and I honestly had never heard about this until DM. Is that really a thing? Is it that the seller artificially inflates it in attempts to get more money (but also out bids most participants, probably)? A buyer supposedly artificially inflates it to knock out other participants? How exactly does this happen and has it actually happened? Is there proof?

Yeah. There was a user that put up two RR's for 330$ each in USD. Also they're the reason RR talk got banned on reddit when I was lurking watching the drama.

For inflated auctions, I seen them happen and called out once or twice on the offical forums. So I'm sure it does happen.



More on topic, personally if someone has no sales and it's a purchase (not trade) that's easy to fix if you never get the item, you just do a charge back.

For trades...I'm so iffy on doing trades, especially if the user doesn't post much or at all. I don't know what a trade entails but if I were to do one with a rare/unorderable custom and I never receive the traded item from their end...what do you do? Even with an insured package it can't replace something you found in adoptions.

Spoiler: Personal Reddit vs. Forums opinion

I much prefer it here instead of Reddit. Forums feel more personal and close. Most people know each other here, feels easier to navigate than all posts unlike reddit where everything is mushed together with no catagories. There's pretty toy posts/stock images but I would like to not see in use shit :I. The BadDragonSFW thread isn't used much otherwise I'd peruse there. I've never had a reddit account due to; users argue with each other and use post history to their advantages to argue with others, the imaginary internet points (karma) is dumb imo, same with downvotes. Mods step in here if there's issues but it seems most of the people here know to mind their manners and not say rude things or ask for in use pics just because someone posts pretty toys....among other things

~~~~Now to Bun or whoever reads this

Kinds hypocritical of me since I don't have feedback but I guess being active here makes up for it (like...I wouldn't tarnish all my effort in certain threads or my name here all these years just to scam people) but I'd be really wary of a user wanting to do trades especially with new accounts. Or public auctions people brought up valid points about new accounts posting just to drive up the price.

I do like the 90 day or however many day wait period to do certain things though, for scammers they'd rather go somewhere they can grab and go vs. Having to wait to do the same thing.

Idk really. I like how it's moderated here and the people. For me if I do a sales post I'd like to sell to active members here and not those that just made a new account to buy from me. Why? Ok so I'm really paranoid about if I sell to someone what if they get the item and try doing a chargeback or claiming that they didn't get their item. (Same feels with trades actually). I've never sold to people but this idea makes me pause wanting to and at least if the user is active here I feel slightly more at ease with selling.


Sorry for rambling I don't know if I articulated my thoughts. It's a long and slow day here today ._.
I'm very wary of selling just because scammers exist. So for rules in place to deter them...have at it. I'd rather have mods enforce rules to deter scammers than no rules. If people don't like scammer preventions they won't use that site and will go elsewhere.

 

[Skunkie]

Personally, I find auctions outside of a proxy-bid and legitimate timing system to be suspect anyhow, so some sensible rules and regs on a forum make me feel better about bidding and listing.
I'm not saying we should completely copy ebay; but to not examine best practices seems remiss.

 

[Skunkie]

I much prefer it here instead of Reddit. Forums feel more personal and close. Most people know each other here, feels easier to navigate than all posts unlike reddit where everything is mushed together with no catagories. There's pretty toy posts/stock images but I would like to not see in use shit :I.
...
Idk really. I like how it's moderated here and the people. For me if I do a sales post I'd like to sell to active members here and not those that just made a new account to buy from me.

I recognize I'm new, and I don't want to be accused of drawbridging, but I feel that what is at stake is preservation of this^^
An (un?)intended effect of having zero prerequisites is that we simply become the easy place to bid for RR's, and the apparent drama that ensues. That is exactly the reason I've never joined reddit.

 

[grey-daze]

I appreciate the clarification on what your approach might be for vouches. I have another question that I don't believe has been specifically addressed:
If the only prerequisite for auctions is an account older than one week (currently the leading option), could an auctioneer choose to restrict an auction further if they wish (based on feedback or similar)?

I think as a potential bidder, I can work with few/no restrictions, because I'm inclined to look at the profiles of the auctioneer and other bidders for red flags before making the decision to bid. It's not perfect, but it's easy for me to abstain from an auction if something doesn't seem right.

As a potential auctioneer, I would be inclined to have some restrictions. I'm a little uncertain exactly what restrictions would make me most comfortable, but it would probably be something like feedback or forum posts or Discord activity. All of these are totally great ways to show involvement in the community. I don't like the idea of selling to someone I don't trust, but I would be too nervous about the potential backlash to cancel an auction. The easiest way to reconcile that conflict is to have some indicator that trustworthy individuals are the only ones making bids. Personally, I would be okay with having a smaller audience and making a little less money in order to have that peace of mind.

Edit: Also, just to clarify on the last paragraph... I've sold to people on Reddit that I've never talked to before or since, so it's not as if I wouldn't sell a normal listing to a new user. I would just tend to be more cautious if it was a toy that is uncommon enough to be worth auctioning.

Actually an edit: I meant to add that, not make a new post, but what's done is done. xD

 

[sugarbunny]

I am still not quite understanding the issue these prerequisites are attempting to solve for.

Safety measure to prevent scamming? e.g. Someone selling a RR they don't actually own?

Safety measure to prevent someone new and unaware of appropriate PayPal use? e.g. Someone sending a RR to a winning bid to someone who used an unfavorable PayPal method such as friends and family, or asked to have their toy sent to an address that was different?

Or something different? I'm struggling a bit because for me, if someone new wants to come and sell some RRs, great! More availability for everyone. If they disappear after that, that's their prerogative.

If someone new who knows nobody wants to bid on a RR, again, great! If they back out at the last second or can't pay, it's easy to followup with those who were next in line. As long as they pay, or give notice they're no longer interested, nothing bad happens. Even if they don't give notice, it's easy enough to say you have x hours to pay after auction ends or I will move onto the next person.

Concern about drama such as people complaining about a price, begging for a RR toy, etc? I think this can be solved by moderation.

Either decision I think can turn people away. Make too strong prerequisites / rules and it may turn new people away (as well as some of us who aren't new), which can stagnate things. Make too little prerequisites / rules and you increase the risk of someone not knowing best selling practices and possibly getting scammed, or turning away people for feeling uncomfortable.

As I said earlier, I am of the thought that less prerequisites are better than more. It's less limiting and I think it makes it more welcoming. In my opinion, a good way to handle this would be to let each person decide how they want to run their auction. If someone is comfortable with no prerequisites and is willing to deal with whatever happens, great. If someone would rather say 'bidding requires x feedback,' then awesome. This lets everybody do what they are most comfortable with while following the overall general rules of selling (e.g. You must have a proof pic, you must list a starting price, you must list the stats, etc)

Sorry this post was a bit long before I got to my suggestion. Had to think 'out loud'

 

[Bun]

personally, i don't feel comfortable running a place that hosts auctions that allow the possibility for sellers to artificially inflate their prices or for randoms to come in and spite bid as they were talking about on reddit. it's really that simple. i'll do whatever the community wants though. if vve end up choosing to do a rule that actually helps something, then the people who have a problem with these rules can host their auction somewhere else. the highest voted option though is barely a limit, but its still a bearable one, i think you can agree on that, so its probably not even going to be an issue anyway.

 

[Kittylordsavior]

personally, i don't feel comfortable running a place that hosts auctions that allow the possibility for sellers to artificially inflate their prices or for randoms to come in and spite bid as they were talking about on reddit. it's really that simple. i'll do whatever the community wants though. if vve end up choosing to do a rule that actually helps something, then the people who have a problem with these rules can host their auction somewhere else. the highest voted option though is barely a limit, but its still a bearable one, i think you can agree on that, so its probably not even going to be an issue anyway.

I agree very much with what Bun has said. The community can make the choice but artificial auction inflation is what I am concerned about. It hasnt been PROVEN to have happened yet but why allow it to happen in the first place? Simple and easy rules in place to protect people in the community seem smart to me.

 

[Skunkie]

In my opinion, a good way to handle this would be to let each person decide how they want to run their auction. If someone is comfortable with no prerequisites and is willing to deal with whatever happens, great. If someone would rather say 'bidding requires x feedback,' then awesome. This lets everybody do what they are most comfortable with while following the overall general rules of selling (e.g. You must have a proof pic, you must list a starting price, you must list the stats, etc)

I considered this, but a double standard would then be created solely for the purpose of enacting rules.
I feel that with higher (than zero) barriers to entry, more legitimate bidders will exist; it is then still the prerogative of the auctioneer to lower their standards to the point where they accept Western Union from Nigerian princes, if they so choose. ^.^

I won a decently high auction from a reputable seller and I don't believe any other bidders were non-legit or spite based. I would personally be turned off the idea of shooting the moon if there was a good chance that I was being bamboozled. In turn, I would bid on less auctions; ultimately leading to a lower sales for the sellers.

IMO Barriers are fleeting, confidence is lasting.