Give product sellers the option to disable comments on their WSO threads

by 98 replies
129
Hi everyone,

We have received some feedback in regards to giving product sellers the option to disable comments on their WSO threads.

Allowing sellers to list closed WSO threads, could attract more sellers with high quality products who have left the forum due to the harassment and the huge amount of time it took to handle all comments. For large sellers with a big list, they would create a WSO, email their list and then potentially get bombarded with too many comments to handle, spam and irrelevant replies.
Of course the sellers would still need to follow by all the new WSO rules.

I also see the benefit of allowing comments from people which are relevant to the WSO. It allows a public avenue for people to clarify points, ask questions and leave legitimate reviews. This public history of conversation helps others who are interested in the product.

Perhaps the solution is to give the seller the choice or maybe allow this option for experienced sellers only.

I wanted to open up the conversation and see what the community thinks in regards to this.
#suggestion forum #comments #disable #give #option #product #sellers #threads #wso
  • Interesting idea but I'm not sure how disabling comments on a Special offer thread would be helpful to a seller.

    It sort of comes with the territory right?

    This is a forum where valid discussion is encouraged and as it relates to a WSO pre-sales
    questions are a great way for a vendor to spot holes in their copy and update or add a FAQ post right under the offer. A lot already do this and update it frequently.

    I'm wondering if those who've suggested it even realize that they can get FRONT page exposure of their WSO on the WF each time a comment is made? LOL Granted it updates each time a new comment is made but still.

    Which brings me to a potential tweak? Why not let the last post section for the WSO display the last 5 or 10 instead? Just a little added benefit for sellers to get some more bang for their buck?

    Anyways back to the topic at hand.

    I think the snarky comments, and spam comments are the real issue and I believe just like the forum is making BIG changes to the WSO rules and enforcing them the same should go for handling these types of posts on their paid advertisements as well.

    Most likely these will not be so predominant as the offers get cleaned up as well.

    At any rate, if a vendor creates a WSO and them mails their list they undoubtedly are going to not only get questions on their thread but they'll get emails directly to their support desk it just comes with the territory!

    So I think it's not a good idea to disable the social interaction by disabling comments on WSO threads.
  • Banned
    Removing the ability to comment removes accountability. Where exactly would a buyer post that the product was not as advertised? Where would they post that they requested and did not receive a refund? Product reviews have long been an important part of WSOs.

    If someone is too busy (which is a lame excuse for supersellers who could easily outsource customer support) to answer pre-sell questions and receive honest reviews from legitimate buyers, then I think they should just sell elsewhere where they can remain immune from feedback.

    It has always been the case that harassment and reviews from non-buyers was simply not allowed. Period... and all they need to do is report those posts that don't meet the standard of an honest review by a buyer or a legitimate pre-sell question.
    • [ 6 ] Thanks
    • [1] reply
    • I think it would be excellent as an OPTION for sellers.

      We used to have some big dog marketers who sold their products at a discount to WF members. They left due to the rude replies and skepticism from people who do nothing but tear others down.

      There are offers that would work well with no comments - and honestly many of the comments these days are not worth paying attention to.
      • [1] reply
  • My immediate reaction to a WSO that disabled comments would be:
    "What is this seller trying to hide?"
    • [ 5 ] Thanks
    • [1] reply
    • Looks like your avatar is contemplating that very question.
      • [ 1 ] Thanks
  • I recently had to close a WSO. A successful WSO that had been bombarded with "I didn't get my download link" comments. Close to 100 buyers successfully downloaded their purchase because they were able to follow simple instructions. Six or seven didn't follow instructions and came to the thread complaining they didn't get the product.

    These complaints killed the offer (people came to the thread looking to buy and didn't because of the comments) and I was eventually forced to take a successful WSO, that would still be selling, down. Being able to delete or turn off commenting would have been a blessing.
    • [ 1 ] Thanks
    • [1] reply
    • So you would sooner turn them off and ignore PM's than help people who buy your product?

      Why make the download so hard anyway, were there further hoops to jump through after paying?

      These complaints killed the offer (people came to the thread looking to buy and didn't because of the comments) how do you know this is the reason they didnt buy?
      • [2] replies
  • Banned
    I say do not allow the disabling of comments. If the seller does not want comments then he or she can create a sales page off-forum. The feedback on the sales thread is what makes the forum sales threads unique.

    If comments are being left that are not allowed then report them for deletion. I agree with some of the others, if comments are turned off I simply won't purchase that product or service on the forum. If I want to purchase products without the ability to have pre-sale questions answered publicly, or without public buyer feedback, then I will buy well known brands and from well known sellers off of the forum.

    Cheers

    -don
    • [2] replies
    • Banned
      It is a unique element of a WSO and for many buyers, it is the one thing that fuels many sales. If they monitor their threads and weed out the argumentative, snarky comments or opinions from non-buyers by reporting those posts that are not either pre-sell questions or buyer reviews, and if their product holds up, the comments are often a plus for sales.

      I've seen plenty of WSOs become a train wreck with legitimate buyer reviews and they deserved that feedback and it helped to alert others not to buy.

      People who don't want to address support problems like people not getting their links should state that all support comments go to the help desk and enforce it, but make certain that you are responding to those concerns at the help desk.
    • I'm in favor of giving sellers the option to disable comments for the following reasons:

      1.) People who actually do what they teach don't have time to reply to hundreds of posts and hundreds of questions. The majority of WSO's being sold are by newbies who have time to answer each individual post and repetitive questions about their $7-$27 product. People who do what they teach do not have time to answer hundreds of posts and hundreds of questions about their $7-$27 product.

      2.) Experienced product sellers are already selling their products on their own websites. Giving them the option to offer their products, at a special price on the Warrior Forum, without costing them hundreds of hours of their time, will give Warriors more purchasing options and allow them to purchase products they previously couldn't afford at the seller's regular website price.

      3.) In reply to people who are saying they wouldn't buy a WSO if they couldn't read others' comments, it's simple: Just don't buy that product if you don't want to. You're entitled to having your own personal criteria, for what you need to make a purchasing decision. Product creators should also be entitled to decide whether or not they want to spend hours of their time answering hundreds of inane and repetitive posts and questions. Just as you have the option to buy or not buy a product that meets your personal criteria, product sellers should also have the option to make a special offer to Warriors, without that automatically meaning that they have to commit unreasonable amounts of time, answering hundreds of posts and comments. Again, keep in mind that people who actually do what they teach do not have the time to invest hundreds of hours, answering Warrior Forum posts. This time issue is the primary reason why most WSO's are being sold by newbies, who do have the time to spend hundreds of hours answering questions about their $7-$27 products. The current quality, of most WSO's being sold, conclusively proves this point.

      4.) In reply to people saying that product sellers can just report inappropriate posts, it doesn't work that way at all. Not by a long shot. Moderators don't automatically remove posts that may be inappropriate. People currently have the option to make completely anonymous posts, claiming that they purchased a WSO, and make negative remarks about the product. There's no way to verify whether someone has or has not purchased a product, just because they claim they have. The success of the few high quality WSOs that are left gets destroyed anytime an anonymous poster decides they're bored and that they'd like to ruin someone's WSO. The notion that inappropriate comments can be removed is not valid, because there's no way to verify whether someone is being truthful or not when they make a post. Moderators can only do so much and they can only remove posts that blatantly break the rules.

      5.) You'd still have the option to send private messages to product sellers. If they reply to your questions and you're satisfied with their answers, you can decide whether or not to buy their product. If they don't reply, you don't like their answer, or you decide not to buy because they don't have time to answer your private message, you still have the option of whether or not to buy their product.

      6.) The last reason I'm in favor of this option comes down to simple economics. Currently, if a product creator decides to make a special offer in the WSO section, they have to account for the massive amount of time it will take them to reply to hundreds of posts and questions. The pricing of their WSO must take this enormous time factor into consideration. Product creators have to price their WSO's to make it worth many hours of their time, while also factoring in the $20 cost of bumping their WSO. Experienced product creators, who do what they teach, could not possibly afford to sell a WSO for $7-$27, in the current set up, because it would require hours and hours of their time. No one who actually does what they teach can afford to spend hours of their time answering questions about a $7-$27 product. On the other hand, if product creators, whose time is truly at a premium, did not have to invest hours of their time answering questions of curious Warriors, they would be in a much better position to offer their products at special prices. This would result in better prices on WSO's and higher quality WSO's, since the time consuming process of answering posts wouldn't have to be factored into a WSO's price. Also, since product sellers, who are busy doing what they teach, would now be in a position to offer their products, without taking time away from their actual businesses, we'd start to see more high quality products return to the WSO section.

      Anyone who has witnessed the decline in the product quality of WSO's, and the mass exodus of high quality product sellers over the years, knows that this would be a very good option to give product sellers.
      • [2] replies
  • Ahh didums, dont the 'large sellers' like having to answer questions? is all they want is to be able to milk the WF members like cash cows every time they want some quick money?

    Dream on, selling a WSO comes with the burden of answering replies and comments, if you dont have the time then dont post an offer.

    There is a WSO I was interested in, I asked some pre sales question in the WSO thread and from the replies I new the product wasnt suitable (also the seller didnt understand anything that didnt involve wordpress) so I didnt buy.

    Imagine he had turned off comments and didnt have time to answer PM's, then imagine I bought the WSO and found out it wasnt suitable, imagine I tried to get a refund but was ignored. Looks like scammers paradise to me.
  • Alaister,

    In my opinion, this would completely undo all the good you are trying to do with cleaning up the WSO section.

    A few thoughts:

    1. Most snarky and rude comments that I have seen - those that derail WSOs, are warranted. They are along the line of "where is my refund" or "why did you say it didn't include cold calling but it in fact does". The rude comments are a result of bad, faulty, scammy WSOs for the most part. Of course, there are exceptions.

    2. Eliminating accountability eliminates customer safety especially when you take into consideration that there is a longstanding rule that comments about WSOs can't be made elsewhere in the forum (such as in the Reviews section) and rule #1.

    3. I think one of the reasons someone may be tempted to buy a WSO is because of the built-in review system. Anyone can sell whatever they want on their own site. More sales are done that way (outside the forum) than in it as it is. So the seller still has that option. I think it's generally a disservice to the customer - the one you are trying to protect with the new WSO rules.

    How you might can make it work:

    1. Eliminate all blind offers. I know the rules are just now being learned and enforced but a lot of comments are along the lines of "is it selling ebooks?", "does it have anything to do with Fiverr", etc. Some of the mods may need some training on what a blind offer is.

    2. Let the seller request deletion of normal, already handled support requests. For example this exchange could be requested to be deleted:

    "I didn't get my download."
    "Okay, sorry about that there was a temporary glitch with Aweber. It should work now."
    "Okay thanks - worked like a charm"

    Or: "I sent you a PM."
    "Got it and am responding now."

    I think refund requests and reviews should be exempted from this rule.

    This would eliminate a LOT of the clutter. Mods already have the responsibility to remove posts in certain situations - that's part of their job. So it really wouldn't take any extra training on your part except to ensure that a mod didn't delete refund requests or reviews.

    3. It's funny that people don't want support tickets clogging up their WSO thread but they love the positive reviews. Eliminate all positive reviews, including those in sales copy because the reviews would be from somewhere else.

    Most of us have the feeling that many of the reviews are fake anyway. How does it turn from 10 brightly shining reviews to scammer WSO of the day by page 2 or 3?

    4. Eliminate the rule forbidding reviews of WSOs in the review section and rule #1.

    5. Eliminate rule #1 for things that happen in the forum. As it stands now, I can blatantly say in a polite but firm way that Joe WSO seller did NOT refund my money even though he promised to in the sales copy ON the WSO thread but I can't say anything resembling name and shame elsewhere on the forum. What I mean is that if I post a scathing review of being scammed by User123455 on the WSO thread then everyone knows who it is. Why not let it happen elsewhere if you take away that right on the WSO thread?

    Some of those may be out in left field but some may work in order to have a win-win-win experience for all.

    Mark

    PS If they really are making $1,236.32 (even though they can't claim it now) with 5 minutes of work and do it all day long they can hire a support team. The fact they don't have one adds credence to the idea they aren't making squat.
    • [ 1 ] Thanks
  • To add to my list above about how to possibly make something like this work, make a new rule that a potential buyer can't ask if there is an OTO. OTO's are designed for buyers. This would eliminate many useless posts.

    At the same time, from a consumer protection standpoint (one of the real reasons people ask this question), limit how many OTOs, downsells, etc. can be in the funnel before someone gets to the product or how they do it. For example, some have said they had to watch a long sales/OTO video without player controls before they got to the download link.

    Also eliminate "thanks, it looks great! I will dig into it this afternoon" type posts which means they haven't even looked at it and there is really no reason to say thanks. Comments like these are mistaken by newbies, I think, as reviews when they really aren't. In other words, these kinds of things should be said AFTER they have at least read the darned thing. Otherwise it's just a waste of time and bandwidth.

    Mark
  • You know what?

    Go ahead and allow sellers to disable comments so when a competitor that's selling something that's similar to what I'm selling disables the comments I'll be happy to rank in all the sales they miss out on.
    • [ 1 ] Thanks
    • [1] reply
    • Banned
      Yeah, I thought the exact same thing as a seller...but I don't think it will be beneficial to the long term health of the WSO section. As a buyer I am most certainly against it and the forum needs a steady flow of buyers. Unless, of course, they think they can sell threads forever to folks that ain't making many sales.

      Established vendors can live off of affiliate traffic to off-site offers, but noobs and not so established sellers do somewhat rely on organic traffic, and organic traffic that will buy is what this forum needs. Credibility is always a good thing, and quality buyer reviews, and solid answers to pre-sale questions do help with credibility. Do I think allowing vendors to disable comments in the WSO section will lure a bunch of the "big dogs" and their traffic back to WF? I don't think so.

      Cheers

      -don
  • I'm for giving sellers the option to disallow comments. The sellers are the Warrior Forum customers and are paying $20 for a post and $20 more for each bump. Any features they may want is what should matter most.

    While not having comments would eliminate negative comments and reviews, it would also eliminate bogus good comments and reviews. One the most common WSO ploys is to give away products to get lots of reviews, so comments do work both ways.

    If you're a potential customer of a WSO that doesn't have comments and you don't like that, don't buy the product. But it should be up to the person paying $20 if they want comments or not.

    Having said this, personally I would always choose to post comments on my WSOs, as I think it's more beneficial than not. But giving sellers more choices is good, since they are the people actually paying for the WSO thread.
    • [ 1 ] Thanks
  • Yeah finding the reviews for a user is not user friendly at all! The quickest way that I know of to see their product reviews is from the earn as an affiliate link, then mouse over any product there selling and when the users profile name appears, click on that.

    Still very user unfriendly for prospective buyers so it's really not a benefit to seller as it is now.
    • [1] reply
    • Banned
      Nor to the buyer who should be able to factor those in before making a buying decision.
      • [ 1 ] Thanks
      • [1] reply
  • Banned
    If a "disable comments" option is enabled for sellers then we should be allowed to discuss those offers in the review section --> that's a no-brainer rule change that should be enacted at the exact same time the disabling comments feature is implemented (if implemented).

    Cheers

    -don
    • [ 1 ] Thanks
    • [1] reply
    • I disagree - if the admins want to try an experiment they don't have to add something to balance it for those who object.

      If people can start threads in Reviews about WSOs - that would totally defeat the purpose of this option....but that's the point, right?

      If members don't like no-comment WSOs they won't buy them. If they don't buy them, sellers will stop using them. It will work or it won't but there is no harm in testing it.

      kay
      • [ 2 ] Thanks
      • [1] reply
  • Alaister,

    I'm not sure I'm understanding your comment about removing reviews at the seller's request. That gets into very murky waters, unless you have clear and published guidelines for what's allowed and what isn't.

    As far as reports of extortion, the smarter creeps know not to use the PM function of the forum to send those kinds of notes. I can tell you from experience that some sellers will claim they've gotten those and are lying just to get a bad review removed.

    Again, like many problems, it's not common but it does happen. And those are the situations most likely to blow up into flame fests and long-term feuds.

    If someone tries the extortion thing and it's proven, they should obviously be removed. Proving it isn't easy, though, unless they use the PM function and the mods are told using the report post option. Anything else is "he said/she said" stuff.

    When you start looking at the way some people will slant pre-sale "questions," you're going to get an idea of just how sneaky a saboteur can be. It won't be a pleasant realization.


    Paul
    • [1] reply
    • Banned
      The only reviews that are allowed will come from the Warrror Payments system, all others will be deleted. So pre-sale questions and clarifications are allowed, but reviews placed directly on the thread are not.

      So do you think the trouble will be distinguishing reviews from pre-sale questions? Or did you possibly miss the part where the only reviews allowed come from the Warrior Payments system? I doubt you did...

      I don't think he is talking about removing Warrior Payments reviews from verified buyers unless they cross a line. Reviews that crossed the line have been deleted in the past, so it's not a new concept. His proposal keeps the non-buyer fake reviews off of the thread completely.

      Not trying to argue with you, just trying to see where you think the main problem will lie.

      Cheers

      -don
      • [ 1 ] Thanks
  • As a matter of policy, it should. Otherwise, you create a situation in which it's possible to create 100% positive threads for a product that paying customers hated.At the point where they let sellers moderate their own threads, I will write this place off as dead.

    That's the worst suggestion I've ever heard, despite hearing it so many times.

    If sellers learn to report *actual* trolls, the trolls can be dealt with. And the sellers will have to use some real discretion in what they report, or else run the risk of making it clear to the mods that they're trying to unfairly manipulate the review process.


    Paul
    • [ 3 ] Thanks
    • [1] reply
    • [DELETED]
    • Totally agree. As a potential buyer of any product, I would definitely want to know why someone didn't like it and requested a refund. Those reviews shouldn't be deleted just because a refund is given. Sure, that would benefit sellers, but it doesn't help potential buyers make an informed decision.

      Sorry, Anthony, but I fully agree with Paul on this one. If sellers want to control all reviews and comments made on their products, then they need to sell them on their own website.
      • [ 1 ] Thanks
  • Don,

    Part of the problem stems from the assumption that everything will be sold through WP. They can make that a reality any time they want, but until they do it leaves a lot of openings in how these things will be handled.

    This part...... is ambiguous, as posted. The intent may be clear to Alaister, but it doesn't seem to be coming through clearly. Of course, I could just be missing something.

    The issue of pre-sales questions is more about the extortionists and trolls than reviewers.

    Anthony,

    [chuckle] Talk about making my point for me...


    Paul
    • [1] reply
    • Banned
      The way I took it is he wants to institute this JUST through Warrior Payments which gives the WP system an advantage in this area, as only verified buyer reviews can be posted to the thread.

      He has no way to verify non-Warrior Pay buyers so people listing JVZoo, W+ threads etc. will still risk non-buyers posting fake and/or malicious reviews. The rude and over-the-top reviews and personal attacks will still be removed.

      I think the mod team, if they are placed in specific areas so they gain experience and understanding, will be able to distinguish (to some extent) the trolls and extortionists from members asking pre-sale questions. I don't think it takes a 140 IQ to figure it out if the mod reads the copy, reads the so-called pre-sale question, and has a basic understanding of what is being sold. Sure they will miss some, but that's the nature of the beast. If you want a foolproof system then list an off-site sales page with no feedback of any kind allowed or run a classified ad in your local newspaper.

      It's not rocket science, especially once a properly trained team is in place. If they need to hire some previous mods to do some advanced training on what they should look for then that is what should be done.

      Cheers

      -don
  • Great idea IMHO, pros and cons though.

    Perhaps elaborating and giving the seller the option to have only comments from purchasers. At least this way it filters a lot of the rubbish and potential buyers can still see reviews and buyer comments.

    I think it would be silly to omit such a feature, and I would be happy to purchase from a well known warrior who answers pm's but has disabled comments. Not so well known ones however, would raise red flags.

    Like I said, pros and cons.
  • Alaister,

    By the way, if you really want to clamp down on problem offers, require people to use verifiable real names when posting anything for sale.


    Paul
    • [ 5 ] Thanks
    • [1] reply

    • Just in case that one gains traction (I see some thanks under it) let me register my objection under a net privacy issue. Thats fine for most of us but there are some Warriors with very unique names where giving out their real name reveals far more about where they live , who they are. who their relatives are than say Mike Brown. Their paying customers have their names etc through their payment processors the whole world doesn't need to have that access. If Freelancer wants to collect that on the backend when paying for the ad then thats fine but actually posting under the name provides nothing significant

      Verifiable names,cards and IDs are not that hard to come by.
      • [1] reply
  • Banned
    [DELETED]
  • [DELETED]
    • [ 1 ] Thanks
  • While I stick to my general dislike of taking away the comments (even though they could be with other possible safeguards put in place as I mentioned in my 2 posts above), I can see very clearly now that if some of this thread's type of dialogue were to be allowed on a WSO it would die.

    There are some people (and I'm not naming names even though I have 2-3 in mind as I write this), where you know that if you ever get into a "discussion" with them they will keep pushing and pushing and pushing and won't let it go -- just like a bully that has to get the last word.

    Sometimes it does go beyond discussion and enters more the realm of just because some people just can't let it go. "Soul crushing" may be extreme for a forum (grow up - it's just a forum) but it does paint the type of black picture/feeling that I'm sure many have experienced here.

    Mark

    Edit: Looks like a lot of what I was referring to in this thread got cleaned up.
    • [ 3 ] Thanks
    • [1] reply
    • Banned
      [DELETED]
    • Banned
      Exactly right, and that's the difference between a thread posted by Alaister, in the suggestion forum, that asks for discussion on potential forum changes that directly affect WSO sellers, buyers and the forum itself, and an actual paid WSO thread.

      For those that don't know this by now, basically the only discussion allowed on WSO threads are pre-sale questions and post-sale reviews. Of course we do see an occasional "can I get a review copy" which often times is not allowed, and we do see some of the "I did not get my download link" types of posts that travlinguy eluded to.

      I still think the general rule that allows only pre-sale questions and buyer reviews on WSO threads is a pretty good one. Most all other comments that the vendor does not think are appropriate can be reported for deletion, and if a mod agrees, the post is deleted. For the most part I think that system has worked fairly well.

      As I had mentioned above, I do think Alaister's suggestion in post #54 makes some sense for those that think they may be having trouble with "non-buyers" posting fake buyer reviews. It should be relatively easy for the admins to track serial refunders if the Warrior Payments platform is used, which is another plus.

      Cheers

      -don
  • I'm just wondering something.

    So a seller posts a WSO and disables comments.
    Sales start coming in and it turns out the product
    is crap for whatever reason and many buyers are
    unhappy.

    As the forum is currently set up those buyers can
    go to the product reviews section and post a there
    review of the product if I'm not mistaken.

    But I think there's an unintended consequence that
    disabling comments is going to create.

    More support tickets submitted directly to the forum
    complaining about the WSO from the buyers. Then
    the mods will have to do all this discovery to actually
    determine if the complaint they just received in the
    support system is from an actual buyer and not a
    troll.

    I'm willing to bet that right now there's already enough
    of this going on currently despite the fact that buyers
    can still post their reviews on sellers threads. So turning
    off comments is only going to increase this tickets at
    the WF support desk.

    Another scenario for submitting tickets to the forum
    about a seller would be a sellers lack of response on
    their support desk. Buyers will then turn to the next
    place they know of to get help, the WF support desk.

    The mod's will then have a duty to investigate the claim
    and try to verify it or whatever.

    It's just messy any way you look at it and I believe it will
    in the end make the Forum and mods more involved in
    a sellers business they they need or should be.

    I don't for a second believe that a feature to disable
    comments on WSO's is what will entice a single power
    seller back to post WSO's.

    I believe the REAL issue is the time it would often take
    for a reported post to be deleted when a seller reported it.

    Perhaps the forum could consider having a mod team that
    is dedicated to only the WSO section. They review a sellers
    offer for approval and they moderate the sellers reports
    of posts on their sales threads.

    Knowing there's dedicated WF support staff who's only job
    is to moderate the WSO section would go a long way in making
    a power seller more comfortable coming back and putting up
    offers.

    Additionally I have to question the sincerity of ANY business
    who has an offer and doesn't want to reply to pre-sales questions
    to to me that's a totally INVALID reason for disabling comments.

    If you don't want to answer pre-sales question then go run your
    offer on paid ad networks NOT a forum where the platform is ALL
    ABOUT DISCUSSION!
    • [ 2 ] Thanks
    • [2] replies
    • Actually I think it is against the current rules to post reviews of WSOs in the product reviews section because they should be posted in the sales thread. At least that is what I recall but may be mistaken.

      Mark
      • [2] replies
    • Banned
      As Mark and Suzanne have stated, you can't post WSO reviews in the review section. I had mentioned in post #52 if comments are disabled on a thread, then I think that thread should be allowed to be reviewed in the review section.

      The no WSO review rule is #6

      Agreed, my thoughts exactly.

      I have stated similar and still believe that will be the case.

      I have seen the admins mention a mod or mods are (or will be) "dedicated" to the WSO section, having a decent sized team of mods that specialize there would be great.

      Bingo! I have stated very close to the same thing a couple of times.

      Nice post.

      Cheers

      -don
      • [ 1 ] Thanks
  • Yes and to expand on this the team needs to be big enough for EACH major time zones normal hours of operation for businesses.

    I might be mistaken but I believe that most of the mods are not in the US time zones and because they obviously have to sleep any post that requires deletion during the a US time zone could end up being there for many hours.

    This is the internets! It doesn't sleep! HAHA
    • [1] reply
    • Most people would have seen the incomplete post and realized I had a computer problem - you are so anxious to argue and be right you jump on it.

      What I wanted to ADD - and couldn't - was - the ONLY CHANGE I see in what Alaister apparently DECIDED to do is the part about adding reviews FROM WARRIOR PAY. That tells me this wasn't really about "no comment" to begin with.

      What about reviews from other systems. Are the reviews posted on WarriorPay going to be the only "valid" reviews available? No one asked, did they? Who will be "adding them"? Mods? Sellers?

      Other than that - every item mentioned as "not allowed" has not been allowed in the past, either. Only difference is the rules were enforced - the threads were moderated.

      My impression was the intent was to run shifts of mods to cover 24 hrs - but that doesn't seem to be happening.

      I think it would be unfair to sellers to allow members to post about their WSO's in the review section. That means the seller could not defend himself without being "promotional" and there's no way to know if the "reviewers" bought the product or not....refunded or not....have a bone to pick or not...have an affiliate link to promote or not...

      I don't have a dog in this hunt. I no longer run WSOs though I do buy them on occasion. I never pay attention to reviews from people unless I KNOW those people through interaction here. Most reviews I see posted are of the nature "I think this sounds like a great idea" or "this is easy to read and understand and should work well". big whoop! I see the same few "reviewers" in WSO after WSO and maybe the only reviews allowed should be from BUYERS not from those will to post after getting free copies.

      I don't think WHAT the rules are is as important as enforcing the rules. That enforcement is critical in the WSO section to protect both buyers and reputable sellers.
      • [ 3 ] Thanks
      • [1] reply
  • This verified seller thing, might could in and of itself, cut out a lot of junk -- especially if the seller uses Warrior Payments . Sure Joe can go get a new WF account, but a new PayPal account might be a little more difficult. WP can track and verify based on the PP account.

    I've mentioned this before as a way to clean up the place and I think FL could require other payment processors to "certify" that Joe Blow (username) matches the PP account old Joe is using.

    Sure Joe can get his buddy to let him borrow his account but...

    Mark
  • Mike,

    Those are valid concerns. I also think the customers' concerns need to be watched out for, and having a real name is important in some cases.

    As long as the forum admin has a real human name (not an easily created company name), most of the concern is met. We have too many sellers who make a habit of creating new companies, or just accounts with fake names, for the sole purpose of getting around previous bans.

    I've been told by two separate lawyers that this is illegal, and considered "unauthorized access to a protected computer." Forcing them to either provide their real names or carry the lie further makes them choose just how deep into fraud they're willing to dive.


    Paul

    PS: For the folks who don't get it, "protected computer" doesn't mean "a device with technical blocks in place to keep you out." It means, any computer covered under the law in question. Which means, any computer in the US or its territories.
    • [ 4 ] Thanks
    • [1] reply

    • I can agree with that 100% then but it seemed by "post" that what was being discussed is the username the WSO showed. Some people used to argue everyone should show their name for marketing but a lot of people don't want to be a personality in the MMO space. they just want to sell their product. Certainly FL should know who they are though.

      certainly and I am for turning off comments if the seller wants it in the present WSO section. I just don't know what would be the reason people go to that other forum. I can see why the seller would want to post there I just don't know what you would classify it as to make me want to go there to look.

      Whats the value add to the BUYER? If none then eh...the traffic is going to be little and nothing compared to the main WSO forum.

      I liked Alaister's compromise and I don't believe because Warrior payments was mentioned that it was never about removing comments

      Many of us said we want just the buyers to post reviews. Like it or not , prefer other systems better or not FL can only verify and control what they have access to and thats their own payment system. WF payments is probably going to come up often . People may love third party systems but theres just a whole lot of stuff that only can be done when its integrated and thats going to be Warrior Payments.

      It might look the same to you but because people want to ask questions and Vbulletin cannot discriminate on its own between a question and a review the seller has to report it. So I think it does constitute a substantial change. The default is remove without question any and all reviews is different. Its just that it cannot be done automatically due to the technical restraints. When a seller reports a negative review then the standard procedure would then be to remove ALL reviews.
  • One thing about FL and Warrior Payments is that not having their own solution available was one of the forum's reasons for not being able to clamp down on various issues in years past.

    Now they do. I haven't used it yet but have read enough to know that many think it's not up to par with the others yet. It sounds like getting it there will be a more and more important priority for FL.

    If Amazon started allowing people to pay in bitcoin through a 3rd party processor, they'd most have to likely remove or otherwise restrict the "verified buyer" tag that comes along with some reviewer's comments simply because Amazon either doesn't know for sure it was really purchased due to limits or it would be too much hassle to set it up or something. That's just the way things work when trying to interface two competing systems in the real world.

    I think it would be a mistake for the perception to be that FL was protecting only products brought through Warrior Payments if at the same time it still wasn't ready for prime time comparatively or if you couldn't use it except to sell WSOs or some such.

    The perception would be one of heavy handed control for their own benefit NOT to help clean up the WSO section. While they have that right, what FL needs more than anything going forward is to build a relationship with the community here to the point that no one ever brings up things like corporate policy (or other jabs) again because there is mutual trust and even friendship. Win-win-win.

    Mark
    • [ 1 ] Thanks
  • I'm going to make a controversial suggestion.

    If the seller uses warriorpayments then they can turn off comments and do what has been said:
    However if the seller uses another payment system then they cant turn off comments or delete any.

    Now here is the bit that will get people upset:
    Raise the price of WSO's, classifieds etc.. to $25-$30 UNLESS they use warriorpayments then it stays at $20 (also keep free offers at $20).

    This way it adds 2 incentives to sellers to use warrior payments, 1 they can control comments to an extent, 2 they pay a lower listing fee.

    This will also benefit FreeLancer as they should see an increase in people using warrior payments which is what they need as they have to recoup the 3 million notes they paid for the forum.
Join the discussion

Next Topics on Trending Feed