PDA

View Full Version : Need community input to make this forum successful



Deb
July 3rd, 2013, 05:50 AM
[This conversation started from this thread (http://fpgeeks.com/forum/showthread.php/3177-The-worst-workmanship-I-ve-yet-encountered-Carneil-Pens). -dannzeman]

The problem with these feedback posts is that they are usually one-sided, like this one. As such, they're of limited benefit to the rest of us. From what you've written, you've decided that there's no benefit in contacting the repairer. That might not be the wisest choice for yourself, but equally importantly Mr Crook has not been made aware of your dissatisfaction and given an opportunity to put it right or explain himself. Further, I think that if you're going to traduce someone's reputation here, the decent thing to do is make them aware that you're doing so, so that they have the opportunity to reply. That way, we'll at least be in a position to make our minds up about the rights and wrongs of the matter.

dannzeman
July 3rd, 2013, 08:45 AM
The problem with these feedback posts is that they are usually one-sided, like this one. As such, they're of limited benefit to the rest of us. From what you've written, you've decided that there's no benefit in contacting the repairer. That might not be the wisest choice for yourself, but equally importantly Mr Crook has not been made aware of your dissatisfaction and given an opportunity to put it right or explain himself. Further, I think that if you're going to traduce someone's reputation here, the decent thing to do is make them aware that you're doing so, so that they have the opportunity to reply. That way, we'll at least be in a position to make our minds up about the rights and wrongs of the matter.
Actually, Deb, if you had bothered to read the rules of this forum you'd know that we contact the other person in situations like this to give them a chance to respond. We also ask that only the facts are presented, which Flounder has done an excellent job of doing. But instead of repeating all the rules, I'll just link it here (http://fpgeeks.com/forum/showthread.php/4-Market-Feedback-Rules) so you can read it for yourself.

Deb
July 3rd, 2013, 09:01 AM
Thank you very much. I have read the rules now. It wasn't that I hadn't bothered, as you rather challengingly choose to put it, it was rather that I was unaware there was a necessity, being a respondent rather than a poster. Having seen this type of one-sided feedback on other groups for years, I assumed that this was yet another instance. Mea culpa. They are excellent rules if they work. Time will tell.

Try to keep your tendency to unnecessary unpleasantness in check. I though I was back in FPN for a moment there.

Jon Szanto
July 3rd, 2013, 09:40 AM
I would look forward to two specific elements to make this thread worth anything at all to me:

1. A response from the repair person
2. Reasoning behind Flounder's decision to choose this person to do the work in the first place.

Addendum: Dan, I think Deb has a point - we *all* have to be ever-vigilant as to how we phrase things, because text-on-screen very frequently does not give the true tone of our statements. It is easy to overlook items such as reading all the sub-rules and notations about the posting regimens of various fora, and a reminder is all that is needed. For instance, I had *no idea* that you (FPG) contact 2nd parties in situations like this. I'll be honest: I just like the way you guys run FPG, and so I haven't read each and every rule, I just have a gut feeling you are running this in a good way.

So, anyway, that is how my brain is working this morning. Only partially caffeinated, so I'll check back later today... :)

Laura N
July 3rd, 2013, 10:34 AM
I would look forward to two specific elements to make this thread worth anything at all to me:

1. A response from the repair person
2. Reasoning behind Flounder's decision to choose this person to do the work in the first place.

Addendum: Dan, I think Deb has a point - we *all* have to be ever-vigilant as to how we phrase things, because text-on-screen very frequently does not give the true tone of our statements. It is easy to overlook items such as reading all the sub-rules and notations about the posting regimens of various fora, and a reminder is all that is needed. For instance, I had *no idea* that you (FPG) contact 2nd parties in situations like this. I'll be honest: I just like the way you guys run FPG, and so I haven't read each and every rule, I just have a gut feeling you are running this in a good way.

So, anyway, that is how my brain is working this morning. Only partially caffeinated, so I'll check back later today... :)

I agree with this totally.

I appreciate the original post. And I appreciate Deb's reminder to keep in mind that there are often two sides to every story. However, that said, and not referring to Deb, I have been in situations where highly lauded eBay sellers or online fountain pen dealers have in fact provided terrible service, and it is disheartening when third parties jump in to defend the seller/repairer by implying that the customer must have been at fault. So it's a fine line. I think the best thing to do is to assume that people are telling the truth, and that one's own particular experience does not mean that others will have the identical experience.

dannzeman
July 3rd, 2013, 02:55 PM
... It wasn't that I hadn't bothered...it was rather that I was unaware there was a necessity, being a respondent rather than a poster.
It's the responsibility of the user to read the rules of any forum before posting, whether responding to or creating a post. This isn't a foreign concept.


...Try to keep your tendency to unnecessary unpleasantness in check. I though I was back in FPN for a moment there.Ha! Good one! It's not like I threatened to ban you. Forgive me (or not) if I fail to sugar coat my comments, but if you had read the rules prior to posting it would have saved you from having to type half your response to Flounder and saved me from having to respond at all.


I would look forward to two specific elements to make this thread worth anything at all to me:

1. A response from the repair person

... I note that apart from this post there are two others dealing with poor service. In neither case has there been a response. So far, so bad.

However, I hope the repairer responds in this case and a mutually satisfactory solution can be found.
Jon, Deb, I wholeheartedly agree that one sided posts are worthless. We make every attempt to contact the other party involved to try to get both sides presented, but we can't force them to respond. What should we do then?

Perhaps one way to make these threads more useful is to only allow the parties involved to comment?

We would very much like to make the Market Feedback forum successful and are interested in hearing suggestions. Maybe a new thread should be started to discuss this?


Addendum: Dan, I think Deb has a point - we *all* have to be ever-vigilant as to how we phrase things, because text-on-screen very frequently does not give the true tone of our statements. It is easy to overlook items such as reading all the sub-rules and notations about the posting regimens of various fora, and a reminder is all that is needed. For instance, I had *no idea* that you (FPG) contact 2nd parties in situations like this. I'll be honest: I just like the way you guys run FPG, and so I haven't read each and every rule, I just have a gut feeling you are running this in a good way.

So, anyway, that is how my brain is working this morning. Only partially caffeinated, so I'll check back later today... :)
Jon, as easy as it might be to overlook a stickied post containing the rules, I don't think that makes for an acceptable excuse. We don't have have a lot of rules here, actually this sub-forum is the only one with rules in which you can get suspended or banned. I don't think it's too much to expect users to know the rules of the communities they participate in.

Deb
July 3rd, 2013, 03:41 PM
Have it your way, if you must, dannzeman. A polite indication would have sufficed but you chose to be unnecessarily unpleasant. That's your privilege. All power corrupts and even the teeny bit of power a board admin has corrupts a teeny bit. The first thing to go is civility.

As regards the Market Feedback Forum; I've never seen it work well. All's well so long as it's complimentary, but when someone has a real complaint either the fireworks start or an unanswered calumny is left to damn someone's reputation eternally. You ask in the rules that people keep their comments subjective - I suspect you mean objective - but objectivity flies out the window in most instances when a person feels they have been wronged. I think it is greatly to Flounder's credit that he kept his comments cool and objective, but in my experience that's the exception.

I suspect that few people respond because by time it comes to their attention they're already presented with a barrage of indignant posts, the posters having only heard one side of the story. It quickly goes downhill, as is evidenced by the poster above who uploaded a picture of Mr Crook with a personal comment. Lest I be misapprehended, I hold no brief Peter Crook. I've never dealt with him nor corresponded with him and I'm only aware of him as one of the authors of Onoto Pen Repair. I just think everyone should have a fair crack of the whip and despite your best efforts I don't think I'm seeing it here.

dannzeman
July 3rd, 2013, 05:26 PM
As regards the Market Feedback Forum; I've never seen it work well. All's well so long as it's complimentary, but when someone has a real complaint either the fireworks start or an unanswered calumny is left to damn someone's reputation eternally. You ask in the rules that people keep their comments subjective - I suspect you mean objective - but objectivity flies out the window in most instances when a person feels they have been wronged. Yes, you're right, I meant objective. It's been updated.

I think the rules state very clearly to present the facts and not make libelous statements. Are they unclear? Do they need to be rewritten?


I suspect that few people respond because by time it comes to their attention they're already presented with a barrage of indignant posts, the posters having only heard one side of the story. It quickly goes downhill, as is evidenced by the poster above who uploaded a picture of Mr Crook with a personal comment. Lest I be misapprehended, I hold no brief Peter Crook. I've never dealt with him nor corresponded with him and I'm only aware of him as one of the authors of Onoto Pen Repair. I just think everyone should have a fair crack of the whip and despite your best efforts I don't think I'm seeing it here.
So, again, I ask, what should we do? Would giving permission to post to only the parties involved make the thread/forum more welcoming by preventing the "barrage of indignant posts"?

Do you think we should just remove the Market Feedback forum all together? What happens when someone does have a bad experience? How do they make other people aware of the situation?

Jon Szanto
July 3rd, 2013, 05:31 PM
Jon, as easy as it might be to overlook a stickied post containing the rules, I don't think that makes for an acceptable excuse. We don't have have a lot of rules here, actually this sub-forum is the only one with rules in which you can get suspended or banned. I don't think it's too much to expect users to know the rules of the communities they participate in.
Ok, Dan, here is The Deal:

I tend to interact with every forum I'm on at the moment in one particular way: I look at the new posts ("What's New" here at FPG, other places similar, some vbb's use an add-on called iSpy). The actual bookmark link for FPG in my browser takes me directly there. I can't even remember the last time I looked at the standard Forum pages, either the main one or any sub-page. As such, I have probably missed pinned rules, and the like.

So, having said that, I hope you can at least give the benefit of the doubt when drawing our attention to a particular that we might have missed. I've adminned and modded forums before, going back to <cough, cough> BBS days. It is no fun having to police. In the instance I decided to get involved in, I have to say I thought it was just a bit curt to call out Deb in that manner. If it were me, I would have just given a reminder (and, naturally, I'll be going over all those rules, etc, later this evening to be up to snuff). I've (hopefully) tried to be a positive member of the community, and really do consider this my main pen forum, with FPB for vintage/arcana areas also. I want to think we can all deal with each other, even during breaches of protocol, with mutual respect. The bottom line for me: I may not have read any particular rules for this sub-forum, but not because I "didn't bother", but because it didn't dawn on me to go check before I started reading the thread. It really is that simple, and non-malicious and non-lazy.

I'm going to have to run off to work soon, but I'd like to see a good discussion on market feedback. It isn't going to be easy, but there is the opportunity to make something good happen. For that, and many other things, we are grateful to you guys for FPG and it's forums!

tandaina
July 3rd, 2013, 06:21 PM
Jon, as easy as it might be to overlook a stickied post containing the rules, I don't think that makes for an acceptable excuse. We don't have have a lot of rules here, actually this sub-forum is the only one with rules in which you can get suspended or banned. I don't think it's too much to expect users to know the rules of the communities they participate in.
Ok, Dan, here is The Deal:

I tend to interact with every forum I'm on at the moment in one particular way: I look at the new posts ("What's New" here at FPG, other places similar, some vbb's use an add-on called iSpy). The actual bookmark link for FPG in my browser takes me directly there. I can't even remember the last time I looked at the standard Forum pages, either the main one or any sub-page. As such, I have probably missed pinned rules, and the like.

I'm going to have to run off to work soon, but I'd like to see a good discussion on market feedback. It isn't going to be easy, but there is the opportunity to make something good happen. For that, and many other things, we are grateful to you guys for FPG and it's forums!

Yup, me too. I mostly read on my phone on the mobile app (Tappatalk), I never leave the "New Posts" page of that app. I haven't a clue what sub-forums posts are even IN, and certainly not what sticky posts are in that forum. I'm just going from thread to thread. Sticky rules make sense for original posters, for the rest I'd hope the general rule of "don't be a jerk" would be sufficient.

And I think it really is important to realize MOST of us are well intentioned and if we've broken a rule it isn't out of malice and a polite reminder of the rules will likely lead to apology. But there really isn't a reason to be short with posters unless they are obviously ignoring requests to behave ourselves.

Market feedback is important to me. What makes sense to me is this:

1. It will always be one sided and he said she said. That's sort of how this works and so everyone reading should enter with that understanding.
2. Posters should be encouraged to contact the vendor/whoever FIRST and only report on their experience after the original party has had their chance to make things right.
3. Personal attacks should be avoided and moderated if necessary. Stick to the facts (as you see them) and leave room for the possibility of things being made right or an agreement being come to, or that you are just plain in the wrong.

We have to put a LOT of trust in the people we send our (obviously precious to us) pens off to. Being able to share our experiences with others is important I think.

spotted and speckled
July 3rd, 2013, 07:15 PM
I just read the rules and both threads. Wondering if perhaps, in future instances, the person who feels wronged should not send the entire post (as it would be published) to the person who did the offending work 24-48 hours before publishing the post, and telling the offender where & when it will be published ? Flounder's original post is a very good example.

Deb
July 3rd, 2013, 07:59 PM
Do you think we should just remove the Market Feedback forum all together? What happens when someone does have a bad experience? How do they make other people aware of the situation?

I think we need to look at what can be achieved and what we actually do achieve. Ideally, we would want some sort of conciliation which enables both parties to clear the air, come to an agreement about faults and mistakes, make a financial settlement should that be necessary and bring the matter to a close. That way, in what I fear may be an ideal world and not the real one, reputations are not butchered and something approaching justice is established. What's happening here, though, is a debate in which, at least in the initial stages, the complainer holds all the aces and an uncompromising "take no prisoners" debate ensues. What will we have at the end? One party will have a seriously damaged reputation, justly or otherwise (we are in a poor position to tell) and the other party will be in the position where no repairer will risk touching his pens. No-one wins. No-one's lot is improved. In fact, everyone's worse off.

How do we arrive at a means of providing the first outcome rather than the second? That's not easy. Society has had to develop civil courts and tribunals because of the difficulty of deciding between contending parties. We're unlikely to develop a comparable system off the cuff here. I'm very close to saying, "Yes, just remove the Market Feedback Forum." That may in the end be the best thing to do if we cannot do better than pen discussion boards have done with this issue up to now. On the other hand, I'm very aware that there's poor workmanship and inequitable deals going on out there and it would be to all our benefit if there was a good way of reaching agreement over them, or at least making the membership aware of things that are clearly and unequivocally wrong. How to do that? Frankly, it seems a bit too ambitious to me, but spotted and speckled's post might be a starting point. It would at least have the two parties talking to each other, rather than attempting to find common ground in the midst of a noisy public debate.

picautomaton
July 3rd, 2013, 10:06 PM
Ok, please explain the jewel that was swopped out with another, explain the scratches, explain the parts returned touching and scraping each other. No Debs the poster did the correct thing and gave us feedback on the shenanigans of a dodgy shop. Passion for pens is what I like to see and read about.

Jon Szanto
July 4th, 2013, 01:44 AM
Ok, please explain the jewel that was swopped out with another, explain the scratches, explain the parts returned touching and scraping each other. No Debs the poster did the correct thing and gave us feedback on the shenanigans of a dodgy shop. Passion for pens is what I like to see and read about.
This really belongs in the initial thread, but...

Just how are *we* to consider one set of "facts" over another? Do we see "before" pictures without the scratches? Etc, etc. All of these are the problems that must be addressed if this concept of a Market Feedback forum is to become a transparent and valid service to the pen community. We are, as a group, going to have to work very hard to avoid the "Are you still beating your wife?" syndrome.

Deb
July 4th, 2013, 02:45 AM
Ok, please explain the jewel that was swopped out with another, explain the scratches, explain the parts returned touching and scraping each other. No Debs the poster did the correct thing and gave us feedback on the shenanigans of a dodgy shop. Passion for pens is what I like to see and read about.

It's good to see that you can take a nice, balanced view of things. I love the masterly way you sift through the evidence before coming to a conclusion.

Tony Rex
July 4th, 2013, 03:04 AM
Shame that Mr. Crook refused to tell his side. qui tacet consentire...

And my feedback as part of the community is:

I like Market Feedback the way it is. Thanks.

Deb
July 4th, 2013, 03:12 AM
Shame that Mr. Crook refused to tell his side. qui tacet consentire...

Wrong thread. Try the other one.

HughC
July 4th, 2013, 05:15 AM
We all make mistakes, we all stuff at times...pen repairers are no exception and we all expect outcomes that aren't achievable all times. I make plenty of mistakes in my business...but they generally only affect my business and don't impact on any one else....I bet even Jon hits the "wrong" drum on rare occasions :bump2: . Accepting you've made a mistake is the hard part as is accepting that someone else hasn't even when you think they have !! The method used here is as good as any, unpleasant issues are never easy but this does make the best of a "bad situation" and encourages all parties to openly discuss the issues. I see little need for change.

Regards
Hugh

picautomaton
July 4th, 2013, 05:40 AM
Ok, please explain the jewel that was swopped out with another, explain the scratches, explain the parts returned touching and scraping each other. No Debs the poster did the correct thing and gave us feedback on the shenanigans of a dodgy shop. Passion for pens is what I like to see and read about.

It's good to see that you can take a nice, balanced view of things. I love the masterly way you sift through the evidence before coming to a conclusion.

I tend to consider myself more selectively permeable -

manoeuver
July 4th, 2013, 05:46 AM
Dan is allowed to be cranky, he's got an infant at home. Cut the man some slack.

bitchfest posts are well worth skipping in any case.

Deb
July 4th, 2013, 06:48 AM
Dan is allowed to be cranky, he's got an infant at home. Cut the man some slack.

bitchfest posts are well worth skipping in any case.

You're right there. I'm beginning to wish I'd skipped this one. Sound and fury, signifying nothing, as old Spokeshafe was wont to say.

Jon Szanto
July 4th, 2013, 12:15 PM
I bet even Jon hits the "wrong" drum on rare occasions :bump2:
Ok, THAT DOES IT!! My barrister will be in touch with you. Or is it bannister? I get so confused. Now, which drum was I supposed to hit?


Dan is allowed to be cranky, he's got an infant at home. Cut the man some slack.
Yet another posting (newborn) I seemed to have missed, so cut me some slack. Sleep deprivation is a tough road (best friend had their first child 4 weeks ago). Best of everything, Dan, this too shall pass. Won't be long before the little one is asking to use the car on Friday night...

dannzeman
July 4th, 2013, 02:34 PM
Tim, thanks for the support. Jon, no worries, I'll have to show off my little girl here in the forums.

Now, let's try to get back on topic.



Ok, please explain the jewel that was swopped out with another, explain the scratches, explain the parts returned touching and scraping each other. No Debs the poster did the correct thing and gave us feedback on the shenanigans of a dodgy shop. Passion for pens is what I like to see and read about.
This really belongs in the initial thread, but...

Just how are *we* to consider one set of "facts" over another? Do we see "before" pictures without the scratches? Etc, etc. All of these are the problems that must be addressed if this concept of a Market Feedback forum is to become a transparent and valid service to the pen community. We are, as a group, going to have to work very hard to avoid the "Are you still beating your wife?" syndrome.

I think we need to figure out a protocol that has the most potential to be the most beneficial to everyone involved, and then we'll need time to test it, and revise the rules/protocol if need be. Wash, rinse, repeat until we find a successful method.

Assuming we get to a point where this forum is successful, I think each case would still need to be considered on a case-by-case basis. I think the big takeaway from these types of feedback threads is whether you agree with how the repairman/retailer/etc. handled the situation in question. Some people may find their actions reasonable and not have a problem sending them their pens or buying from them. Others may feel differently and choose not to do business with them.

I would like to use this thread to figure out this sub-forum can be successful. Our current setup clearly isn't working.

Here are some ideas that I have:

If someone's going to post here with negative feedback about a repairman, they need to let them know before posting here.

In an attempt to reduce the "noise" in these threads, people not involved in the dispute can only respond after each party involved has commented.

Only questions may be asked from those not directly involved to obtain clarity of the situation and prevent finger pointing.

These are just some quick thoughts. I fully expect lots of criticism on these points. I also expect suggestions.

Deb
July 4th, 2013, 02:39 PM
Last night, rather foolishly as it turns out, I put some time and effort into the near-impossible task of developing a fair feedback system. That it was foolish is shown by what's going on in the parent thread. They don't want justice, they just want a bloodbath and a sacrificial victim to add some spice and excitement to the soap opera that is their lives. They remind me of nothing so much as the blood-spattered tricoteuses at the foot of the guillotine. Mr. Crook's reputation is in shatters. Whether he was any good or not we can't tell now any more than we could yesterday. I don't know Mr Crook but I do know several other restorers, fine men and women, and I suspect that even the best among them could not defend themselves against the trial by emotive assertion that goes on here. This baying mob is very bad for our hobby.

Flounder
July 4th, 2013, 02:40 PM
I'll make this suggestion: keep it going, it's the best there is.

Flounder
July 4th, 2013, 02:41 PM
Deb, please stop setting yourself up as an authority regarding what other people want and think.

Jon Szanto
July 4th, 2013, 02:54 PM
I, myself, will strive mightily to stay on topic, because, after all...

3821

AndyT
July 4th, 2013, 04:54 PM
Here are some ideas that I have:

If someone's going to post here with negative feedback about a repairman, they need to let them know before posting here.

In an attempt to reduce the "noise" in these threads, people not involved in the dispute can only respond after each party involved has commented.

Only questions may be asked from those not directly involved to obtain clarity of the situation and prevent finger pointing.



I agree wholeheartedly on all three points. The thread which started this kerfuffle would be best made read only for the time being except for Flounder and Mr Crook should he wish to respond on this forum.

To my mind heavy handed moderation is a bad thing, and disallowing negative feedback would be a disservice to the community here. On the other hand, the kind of ad hominem attacks which were posted yesterday by uninvolved parties lowered the tone to the point of toxicity, without advancing the discussion one jot. I do not think FPG should be in the business of providing a space where tradespeople can be tried and condemned in their absence, so if the market feedback board is to be of value it needs to be more evenhanded, and calmer.

Jon Szanto
July 4th, 2013, 04:57 PM
Spot on, Andy.

Heliotrope
July 5th, 2013, 06:56 AM
Tim, thanks for the support. Jon, no worries, I'll have to show off my little girl here in the forums.

Now, let's try to get back on topic.



Ok, please explain the jewel that was swopped out with another, explain the scratches, explain the parts returned touching and scraping each other. No Debs the poster did the correct thing and gave us feedback on the shenanigans of a dodgy shop. Passion for pens is what I like to see and read about.
This really belongs in the initial thread, but...

Just how are *we* to consider one set of "facts" over another? Do we see "before" pictures without the scratches? Etc, etc. All of these are the problems that must be addressed if this concept of a Market Feedback forum is to become a transparent and valid service to the pen community. We are, as a group, going to have to work very hard to avoid the "Are you still beating your wife?" syndrome.

I think we need to figure out a protocol that has the most potential to be the most beneficial to everyone involved, and then we'll need time to test it, and revise the rules/protocol if need be. Wash, rinse, repeat until we find a successful method.

Assuming we get to a point where this forum is successful, I think each case would still need to be considered on a case-by-case basis. I think the big takeaway from these types of feedback threads is whether you agree with how the repairman/retailer/etc. handled the situation in question. Some people may find their actions reasonable and not have a problem sending them their pens or buying from them. Others may feel differently and choose not to do business with them.

I would like to use this thread to figure out this sub-forum can be successful. Our current setup clearly isn't working.

Here are some ideas that I have:

If someone's going to post here with negative feedback about a repairman, they need to let them know before posting here.

In an attempt to reduce the "noise" in these threads, people not involved in the dispute can only respond after each party involved has commented.

Only questions may be asked from those not directly involved to obtain clarity of the situation and prevent finger pointing.

These are just some quick thoughts. I fully expect lots of criticism on these points. I also expect suggestions.


As a consumer of fountain pen services, I like the idea of a marketplace feedback forum. That being said, the only posts that I found particularly helpful in the original thread were #1 (restrained and data-rich description of the problem) and #13 (description of response from the service provider). I appreciate that the original poster disclosed what was done to resolve the dispute prior making the original post, as that is important context in considering the service provider's response. I really like that the service provider is contacted and given an opportunity to respond. Whether they do or not is up to them. Readers of the thread can make up their own minds based on both the information provided (or not provided) and how it is conveyed.

Perhaps a format for original posts can be developed that encourages relevant context to be disclosed in an original negative post (including such things as standard questions about what the service provider was asked to do and what attempt was made to resolve the problem before posting, and places for photos). Original posters could tell the story in their own words following this initial overview.

I like the first 2 rules listed above. The third one seems difficult to administer because questions can be written in a way that points fingers.

Just some initial thoughts. This is a challenging but worthwhile question.

TSherbs
July 5th, 2013, 08:00 AM
What "community input" is being sought here? (question refers to the thread title)

KrazyIvan
July 5th, 2013, 08:40 AM
I like the idea of a feedback forum. I also like the idea that only the parties involved would be able to post to the thread. All the extra noise is pointless and I know I have added to that noise.

I do suggest that maybe a private exchange happen first. After two private attempts at getting things resolved fail, then it should go public. The private attempts might be cc'd to an email address as a heads up to the administration here that a potential thread is going to go public. I don't think Dan or Eric have the time nor the incentive to moderate a dispute but just the heads up might benefit them, or not. Doing the private attempt first gives the servicing agent a chance to make things right. The customer still has the option to go public if things go wrong (not that they could not go public somewhere else).

Deb
July 5th, 2013, 08:43 AM
Here are some ideas that I have:

If someone's going to post here with negative feedback about a repairman, they need to let them know before posting here.

In an attempt to reduce the "noise" in these threads, people not involved in the dispute can only respond after each party involved has commented.

Only questions may be asked from those not directly involved to obtain clarity of the situation and prevent finger pointing.



I agree wholeheartedly on all three points. The thread which started this kerfuffle would be best made read only for the time being except for Flounder and Mr Crook should he wish to respond on this forum.

To my mind heavy handed moderation is a bad thing, and disallowing negative feedback would be a disservice to the community here. On the other hand, the kind of ad hominem attacks which were posted yesterday by uninvolved parties lowered the tone to the point of toxicity, without advancing the discussion one jot. I do not think FPG should be in the business of providing a space where tradespeople can be tried and condemned in their absence, so if the market feedback board is to be of value it needs to be more evenhanded, and calmer.

This is rather better than yesterday's farrago of nonsense but I think there's still a long way to go. Unless you want to be responsible for driving the last few competent repair people into early retirement a system of absolute fairness needs to be worked out, so that the loudest voice or the best writer doesn't automatically carry the day. You will, of course, be presented with two contending statements. How do you decide who is telling the truth? Most repairers are running a business. They communicate with their customers. What incentive is there for them to present themselves before a self-appointed kangaroo court? Many repairers ( I proudly count myself one of their number) are independent and ornery and they're highly likely to tell you to go **** yourselves. If that happens you may find yourself condemning a trader just because he doesn't want to play your game. Is that fair? Is it accurate? Does it serve the interests of the pen community?

The assertion was made several times in the other thread that the customer is king, which comes pretty close to saying that the complainer is always right. Thankfully I decided when I began repairing pens that I wouldn't do so direct for the public. I've been around long enough to know that though the customer is always king, not all kings are well-intentioned or even sane. The related problem that I see here is that the repairer is the only one with anything at risk, whereas the complainer has nothing to lose. Very inequitable. I'm serious about driving repairers out of the business. I repair pens for a living, and I make a pretty bare one. I'd earn as much stacking shelves in the supermarket but I love what I do. Pens are my life and my passion. I - and I suspect many other repairers - am not here for the money but for the satisfaction. But where's the satisfaction if my reputation can be lightly dismissed by a self-appointed tribunal that doesn't even work within a legal framework?

If you're going to do this you'd better get it right, if only because you will have to live with the consequences.

KrazyIvan
July 5th, 2013, 08:50 AM
The customer does have something to lose. Once word gets around about a system like this, I can see repairers looking up customers to see if they will take work from them or not. It might not happen on a big scale but it already happens, per some threads I have read on other forums. Sellers on eBay can already do this. A seller can block someone from buying if they so choose.

Deb
July 5th, 2013, 09:27 AM
I can see repairers looking up customers to see if they will take work from them or not.

So you're saying a complainant has to give his/her real name? Good idea. That'll work...

Jon Szanto
July 5th, 2013, 10:30 AM
The customer does have something to lose. Once word gets around about a system like this, I can see repairers looking up customers to see if they will take work from them or not. It might not happen on a big scale but it already happens, per some threads I have read on other forums. Sellers on eBay can already do this. A seller can block someone from buying if they so choose.
First off, I *highly* doubt this. More to the point, if it really came to pass, it would add more incentive for people to be honest and straight-forward with the descriptions of any problems they've had, instead of going off on a histrionic rant.

I just can't imagine people like Ron Zorn or Sherrell Tyree, etc, looking around at internet forums to vet their potential customers. When you open your door to the public, you are going to get a certain percentage of trouble cases, and it just wouldn't be worth their time to try and pre-empt that.

AndyT
July 5th, 2013, 11:30 AM
So you're saying a complainant has to give his/her real name? Good idea. That'll work...

Yes, it would. If only in terms of making people have a good long think before posting something which might turn out to be actionable. There's a lot at stake here, as Googling "Carneil Pens" today demonstrates.



The customer does have something to lose. Once word gets around about a system like this, I can see repairers looking up customers to see if they will take work from them or not.
I *highly* doubt this.

I beg to differ, Jon. For a while I used to offer a highly specialised tool maintenance service to members of certain fora, and I was very selective indeed about who I worked for. Admittedly things might have been different had it been a significant source of income, but the last thing one needs is to second guessed by an awkward customer who thinks he's knowledgeable on account of reading some stuff on the internet.

Jon Szanto
July 5th, 2013, 11:34 AM
Andy, I was thinking on a larger scale, but certainly take your experiences into account.

Also, as to Deb's point: I'm just not sure how you would enforce the requirement for people to post using Real World info (name, etc). It would certainly cut down on the volume, because people just love to rant... anonymously. See: Yelp.

jar
July 5th, 2013, 11:39 AM
Forums like this seldom serve the purpose intended. For one reason, only one side is open and named. Second, resolution if there is to be any resolution must be between the two parties. Third, the customer should not be king. Fourth, no one other than the two primary parties are actually involved or relevant to the issue under discussion. Fifth, there is no formal or vetted method of introducing evidence in the forum.

A method of formal arbitration might work but needs to be out of the general discussion as well as not public to be effective.

Deb
July 5th, 2013, 11:41 AM
Of course it would work, in the sense that it would reduce complaints to zilch. However, I suspect it won't happen. Turkeys voting for Christmas and all that. In the unlikely eventuality that we do go down that road, it's only fair that we start with Flounder.

Deb
July 5th, 2013, 11:44 AM
Forums like this seldom serve the purpose intended. For one reason, only one side is open and named. Second, resolution if there is to be any resolution must be between the two parties. Third, the customer should not be king. Fourth, no one other than the two primary parties are actually involved or relevant to the issue under discussion. Fifth, there is no formal or vetted method of introducing evidence in the forum.

A method of formal arbitration might work but needs to be out of the general discussion as well as not public to be effective.

Common sense arrived at last.

dannzeman
July 5th, 2013, 11:56 AM
Here are some ideas that I have:

If someone's going to post here with negative feedback about a repairman, they need to let them know before posting here.

In an attempt to reduce the "noise" in these threads, people not involved in the dispute can only respond after each party involved has commented.

Only questions may be asked from those not directly involved to obtain clarity of the situation and prevent finger pointing.



I agree wholeheartedly on all three points. The thread which started this kerfuffle would be best made read only for the time being except for Flounder and Mr Crook should he wish to respond on this forum.

To my mind heavy handed moderation is a bad thing, and disallowing negative feedback would be a disservice to the community here. On the other hand, the kind of ad hominem attacks which were posted yesterday by uninvolved parties lowered the tone to the point of toxicity, without advancing the discussion one jot. I do not think FPG should be in the business of providing a space where tradespeople can be tried and condemned in their absence, so if the market feedback board is to be of value it needs to be more evenhanded, and calmer.

Would everyone agree that my three suggestions are a start to minimizing ad hominen attacks and improve the function of a Market Feedback forum?





As a consumer of fountain pen services, I like the idea of a marketplace feedback forum. That being said, the only posts that I found particularly helpful in the original thread were #1 (restrained and data-rich description of the problem) and #13 (description of response from the service provider). I appreciate that the original poster disclosed what was done to resolve the dispute prior making the original post, as that is important context in considering the service provider's response. I really like that the service provider is contacted and given an opportunity to respond. Whether they do or not is up to them. Readers of the thread can make up their own minds based on both the information provided (or not provided) and how it is conveyed.Bold emphasis mine. This is how I envision these types of threads working. Not every case is going to be black and white where one party is clearly in the wrong. I think it comes down to whether you feel the service provider in question has done anything unreasonable. Some people won't think so and won't have problem doing business with them. Others will disagree and not do business with them.


Perhaps a format for original posts can be developed that encourages relevant context to be disclosed in an original negative post (including such things as standard questions about what the service provider was asked to do and what attempt was made to resolve the problem before posting, and places for photos). Original posters could tell the story in their own words following this initial overview.

I like the first 2 rules listed above. The third one seems difficult to administer because questions can be written in a way that points fingers.

...I agree with you about my third suggestion of only allowing questions to be asked. I would take a lot of work to administer each thread and question being asked to make sure they're not phrased in such a way that points fingers. However, a lot of clarity can be gained by asking the right questions. What would be more beneficial, to only allow the parties involved to make their case and close the thread or to allow the parties involved to make their case and allow people to ask questions?

dannzeman
July 5th, 2013, 11:59 AM
What "community input" is being sought here? (question refers to the thread title)
We want to hear your thoughts and ideas on the issue. What do you think?

Deb
July 5th, 2013, 12:09 PM
Would everyone agree that my three suggestions are a start to minimizing ad hominen attacks and improve the function of a Market Feedback forum?


I think you need to read what has been said since you made those suggestions. The debate has moved on from there.

Flounder
July 5th, 2013, 12:09 PM
I'd accept all three proposed rules.

Flounder
July 5th, 2013, 12:14 PM
Would everyone agree that my three suggestions are a start to minimizing ad hominen attacks and improve the function of a Market Feedback forum?


I think you need to read what has been said since you made those suggestions. The debate has moved on from there.

Into presupposing other people's thoughts and motivations (http://fpgeeks.com/forum/showthread.php/3191-Need-community-input-to-make-this-forum-successful?p=37649&viewfull=1#post37649), putting words into other people's mouths (http://fpgeeks.com/forum/showthread.php/3191-Need-community-input-to-make-this-forum-successful?p=37727&viewfull=1#post37727), and hysterical pre-revolutionary analogy. You do not chair this debate Deb.

Deb
July 5th, 2013, 12:21 PM
Steady, Flounder. You're getting upset.

Flounder
July 5th, 2013, 12:28 PM
Once again (http://fpgeeks.com/forum/showthread.php/3191-Need-community-input-to-make-this-forum-successful?p=37651&viewfull=1#post37651).

dannzeman
July 5th, 2013, 12:35 PM
Would everyone agree that my three suggestions are a start to minimizing ad hominen attacks and improve the function of a Market Feedback forum?


I think you need to read what has been said since you made those suggestions. The debate has moved on from there.
Actually, it hasn't. People are suggesting ways to make this forum work and others are suggesting why they won't work.

Jon Szanto
July 5th, 2013, 12:37 PM
You do not chair this debate Deb.
Is there a history between you two we should know about?

Flounder
July 5th, 2013, 12:49 PM
Nope. Nothing. Never. Certainly can't think of anything.

It's just a bit much that someone who at first doesn't read the rules of a forum, then considers a rewrite of the rules a waste of time because she considers those who participate in a forum a "baying mob" should then presume to dictate to the chair the course of debate on the topic of forum rules.

Deb
July 5th, 2013, 12:52 PM
Would everyone agree that my three suggestions are a start to minimizing ad hominen attacks and improve the function of a Market Feedback forum?


I think you need to read what has been said since you made those suggestions. The debate has moved on from there.
Actually, it hasn't. People are suggesting ways to make this forum work and others are suggesting why they won't work.

That's one way of characterising it, I suppose, but nonetheless discussion took place that make some of your suggestions less apposite than they may have appeared at first. Of course you're entitled to ignore what other people say if it suits you. It's your play-park.

Jon Szanto
July 5th, 2013, 12:59 PM
Nope. Nothing. Never. Certainly can't think of anything.

It's just a bit much that someone who at first doesn't read the rules of a forum, then considers a rewrite of the rules a waste of time because she considers those who participate in a forum a "baying mob" should then presume to dictate to the chair the course of debate on the topic of forum rules.
While I don't agree with your assessment, I appreciate you indicating that there isn't anything in the past that colors the conversation.

Jon Szanto
July 5th, 2013, 01:02 PM
Of course you're entitled to ignore what other people say if it suits you. It's your play-park.
Easy, girl. We're all trying to sort this out.

Annie
July 5th, 2013, 01:06 PM
Here are some ideas that I have:

If someone's going to post here with negative feedback about a repairman, they need to let them know before posting here.

In an attempt to reduce the "noise" in these threads, people not involved in the dispute can only respond after each party involved has commented.

Only questions may be asked from those not directly involved to obtain clarity of the situation and prevent finger pointing.



I agree wholeheartedly on all three points. The thread which started this kerfuffle would be best made read only for the time being except for Flounder and Mr Crook should he wish to respond on this forum.

To my mind heavy handed moderation is a bad thing, and disallowing negative feedback would be a disservice to the community here. On the other hand, the kind of ad hominem attacks which were posted yesterday by uninvolved parties lowered the tone to the point of toxicity, without advancing the discussion one jot. I do not think FPG should be in the business of providing a space where tradespeople can be tried and condemned in their absence, so if the market feedback board is to be of value it needs to be more evenhanded, and calmer.

This is rather better than yesterday's farrago of nonsense but I think there's still a long way to go. Unless you want to be responsible for driving the last few competent repair people into early retirement a system of absolute fairness needs to be worked out, so that the loudest voice or the best writer doesn't automatically carry the day. You will, of course, be presented with two contending statements. How do you decide who is telling the truth? Most repairers are running a business. They communicate with their customers. What incentive is there for them to present themselves before a self-appointed kangaroo court? Many repairers ( I proudly count myself one of their number) are independent and ornery and they're highly likely to tell you to go **** yourselves. If that happens you may find yourself condemning a trader just because he doesn't want to play your game. Is that fair? Is it accurate? Does it serve the interests of the pen community?

The assertion was made several times in the other thread that the customer is king, which comes pretty close to saying that the complainer is always right. Thankfully I decided when I began repairing pens that I wouldn't do so direct for the public. I've been around long enough to know that though the customer is always king, not all kings are well-intentioned or even sane. The related problem that I see here is that the repairer is the only one with anything at risk, whereas the complainer has nothing to lose. Very inequitable. I'm serious about driving repairers out of the business. I repair pens for a living, and I make a pretty bare one. I'd earn as much stacking shelves in the supermarket but I love what I do. Pens are my life and my passion. I - and I suspect many other repairers - am not here for the money but for the satisfaction. But where's the satisfaction if my reputation can be lightly dismissed by a self-appointed tribunal that doesn't even work within a legal framework?

If you're going to do this you'd better get it right, if only because you will have to live with the consequences.

The complainer has nothing to lose??? I do hope you are joking. How about the loss of a pen? If not the whole pen, what about the loss of a jewel or a cap?

Oh and this is a legal framework - we are each accountable for what we say. The repairer is accountable to his customer and to Trading Standards. If the customer makes a false claim the law will deal with it. I'm really pleased that feedback can be given here so that the good guys receive recognition and the bad ones are outed. It's a fact of life that you can rate your electrician, your doctor or your plumber or anyone who wants to moonlight as a worrying combination of all three. Those who do a good job have naff all to worry about and probably don't have the time.

dannzeman
July 5th, 2013, 01:08 PM
Would everyone agree that my three suggestions are a start to minimizing ad hominen attacks and improve the function of a Market Feedback forum?


I think you need to read what has been said since you made those suggestions. The debate has moved on from there.
Actually, it hasn't. People are suggesting ways to make this forum work and others are suggesting why they won't work.

That's one way of characterising it, I suppose, but nonetheless discussion took place that make some of your suggestions less apposite than they may have appeared at first. Of course you're entitled to ignore what other people say if it suits you. It's your play-park.
It appears the majority of people who've voiced their opinion seem to be for this type of forum, assuming it can be made to work. When that shifts and the majority feels we should do away with it, then we will. Until then, I'm going to continue to facilitate the discussion of ways to make it work.


...It's your play-park.
Maybe ultimately, yes, since Eric and I are the only admins. But that's never been our philosophy in the way we run things here. We created sub-forums here that haven't been created elsewhere even after hundreds of requests. We've even removed forums that the community felt weren't needed, even though I disagreed with the decision. The FPGeeks forum is your community just as much as it mine. You have just as much say as I do, which is why we're having this discussion.

Flounder
July 5th, 2013, 01:15 PM
Dan, is there any chance of getting my reply added to the original thread?

Jon Szanto
July 5th, 2013, 01:20 PM
The complainer has nothing to lose??? I do hope you are joking. How about the loss of a pen? If not the whole pen, what about the loss of a jewel or a cap?

Oh and this is a legal framework - we are each accountable for what we say. The repairer is accountable to his customer and to Trading Standards. If the customer makes a false claim the law will deal with it. I'm really pleased that feedback can be given here so that the good guys receive recognition and the bad ones are outed. It's a fact of life that you can rate your electrician, your doctor or your plumber or anyone who wants to moonlight as a worrying combination of all three. Those who do a good job have naff all to worry about and probably don't have the time.

To the first point: in one direction, an owner might lose a pen; in the other direction, a business person might lose their livelihood. I don't consider those equivalent.

I think one must be quite careful in discussing legalities, because this board is international, and differing business ethics and legal standards are in play. As for giving feedback, certainly that can and will be a good thing, once a mode is put in place that is as fair, transparent, and accountable as can be made. There is already a lot of documentation of the reputations of good businesses being harmed to varying degrees by the anonymity of Internet commenting. When people can hide behind the screen, they tend to say all manner of things. We need to find a way to deal with that, in both directions.

As to your very last sentence, let's take a concrete example: what if Mr. Crook has had an exemplary track record, and Mr. "Flounder" is the first person with a problem? Does Mr. Crook still have "naff all to worry about"? Is it not reasonable to expect the occasional loon (hypothetical, not Mr. "Flounder") to post a rant about an otherwise reputable business and end up with the Guilty Until Proven Innocent angle?

This shit has to be handled very carefully, if we are to really have a valuable tool to work with.

Flounder
July 5th, 2013, 01:28 PM
"let's take a concrete example: what if Mr. Crook has had an exemplary track record, and Mr. "Flounder" is the first person with a problem?

Jon, I consider that example not concrete but hypothetical, recalling oldstoat's post (http://fpgeeks.com/forum/showthread.php/3177-The-worst-workmanship-I-ve-yet-encountered-Carneil-Pens?p=37526&viewfull=1#post37526). But I see what you mean, and take your point.

dannzeman
July 5th, 2013, 01:33 PM
The intention of this forum is not to act as a court and decide one party guilty or innocent. The intent is for people to be able to share their experiences, good or bad, so that others can make an informed decision about who to buy from or send their pens to. I'm not explaining that because I don't think you understand our intent, jar, I'm doing so to make sure others understand that and to make our intent clear.

Do you think there is way to make it work?


Forums like this seldom serve the purpose intended. For one reason, only one side is open and named.
What if we required users to verify their identity with an admin and include their real name in their post so both parties are clearly named?


Second, resolution if there is to be any resolution must be between the two parties. Third, the customer should not be king.Agreed.

Jon Szanto
July 5th, 2013, 01:43 PM
Jon, I consider that example not concrete but hypothetical, recalling oldstoat's post (http://fpgeeks.com/forum/showthread.php/3177-The-worst-workmanship-I-ve-yet-encountered-Carneil-Pens?p=37526&viewfull=1#post37526). But I see what you mean, and take your point.
Likewise, that was a rather poor use of the term "concrete" on my part. Glad the gist got through!

Heliotrope
July 5th, 2013, 02:07 PM
Here are some ideas that I have:

If someone's going to post here with negative feedback about a repairman, they need to let them know before posting here.

In an attempt to reduce the "noise" in these threads, people not involved in the dispute can only respond after each party involved has commented.

Only questions may be asked from those not directly involved to obtain clarity of the situation and prevent finger pointing.



I agree wholeheartedly on all three points. The thread which started this kerfuffle would be best made read only for the time being except for Flounder and Mr Crook should he wish to respond on this forum.

To my mind heavy handed moderation is a bad thing, and disallowing negative feedback would be a disservice to the community here. On the other hand, the kind of ad hominem attacks which were posted yesterday by uninvolved parties lowered the tone to the point of toxicity, without advancing the discussion one jot. I do not think FPG should be in the business of providing a space where tradespeople can be tried and condemned in their absence, so if the market feedback board is to be of value it needs to be more evenhanded, and calmer.

Would everyone agree that my three suggestions are a start to minimizing ad hominen attacks and improve the function of a Market Feedback forum?





As a consumer of fountain pen services, I like the idea of a marketplace feedback forum. That being said, the only posts that I found particularly helpful in the original thread were #1 (restrained and data-rich description of the problem) and #13 (description of response from the service provider). I appreciate that the original poster disclosed what was done to resolve the dispute prior making the original post, as that is important context in considering the service provider's response. I really like that the service provider is contacted and given an opportunity to respond. Whether they do or not is up to them. Readers of the thread can make up their own minds based on both the information provided (or not provided) and how it is conveyed.Bold emphasis mine. This is how I envision these types of threads working. Not every case is going to be black and white where one party is clearly in the wrong. I think it comes down to whether you feel the service provider in question has done anything unreasonable. Some people won't think so and won't have problem doing business with them. Others will disagree and not do business with them.


Perhaps a format for original posts can be developed that encourages relevant context to be disclosed in an original negative post (including such things as standard questions about what the service provider was asked to do and what attempt was made to resolve the problem before posting, and places for photos). Original posters could tell the story in their own words following this initial overview.

I like the first 2 rules listed above. The third one seems difficult to administer because questions can be written in a way that points fingers.

...I agree with you about my third suggestion of only allowing questions to be asked. I would take a lot of work to administer each thread and question being asked to make sure they're not phrased in such a way that points fingers. However, a lot of clarity can be gained by asking the right questions. What would be more beneficial, to only allow the parties involved to make their case and close the thread or to allow the parties involved to make their case and allow people to ask questions?

I agree that questions can be valuable, so I would allow questions after both parties make a response. The questions will be better informed after both sides have spoken. That opens the possibility, which would need further discussion, that no questions would be allowed if the service provider decides not to respond. I can think of different ways to handle this, and various ramifications, but since there have been multiple posts since I began writing this response, I will end now and catch up to see where the discussion stands.

Annie
July 5th, 2013, 02:53 PM
It's called feedback isn't it? That's what is should be. Arbitration is something else entirely. The idea that a repairer's living is trashed on the strength of it is bullshit. I'm self employed and I'm only as good as my last gig and eating next month depends upon it. It makes me pretty hard working and honest. If I get the odd bad review it makes me look at why and what I could have done better.

jar
July 5th, 2013, 02:53 PM
The intention of this forum is not to act as a court and decide one party guilty or innocent. The intent is for people to be able to share their experiences, good or bad, so that others can make an informed decision about who to buy from or send their pens to. I'm not explaining that because I don't think you understand our intent, jar, I'm doing so to make sure others understand that and to make our intent clear.

Do you think there is way to make it work?


What if we required users to verify their identity with an admin and include their real name in their post so both parties are clearly named?


Second, resolution if there is to be any resolution must be between the two parties. Third, the customer should not be king.Agreed.

While I wish there was a way to do that I'm not at all sure it is reasonable or likely.

Requiring that real names be identified would be a great idea if it were in some prefect world. Unfortunately the internet is not yet a perfect world and so exposing peoples real name is probably neither practical or wise.

Jon Szanto
July 5th, 2013, 02:56 PM
One person's bullshit is another person's considered opinion. Life is full and varied.

Flounder
July 5th, 2013, 03:30 PM
One woman's bullshit is another person's considered opinion. Life is full and varied.

From the reader's side, this is pretty much the underlying assumption to any kind of feedback. I think so long as the rules credit people with the intelligence to make up their own minds about what they read in feedback threads, the rules are on the right track. Presuming a great deal about the reader's inabililty to do so, Deb assumes "Mr. Crook's reputation is in shatters.".

Another poster has mentioned googling for "Carneil Pens" (as I did before using his services). My negative feedback features in the results. On the same page of results, another costumer is "mightily pleased" with a MB146 bought from Carneil Pens.

Jon Szanto
July 5th, 2013, 03:47 PM
My perspective was the very real-world phenomenon of anonymous online reviews and commenting. Even the most casual Googling of the topic will find much to support at impression that these kind of negative feedback posts can, and do, cause real harm to a small business. Does it happen every time? Certainly not, but there is too much anecdotal evidence to completely discount it, which is what I assume the term "bullshit" is for.

Annie makes a valid point in that upon receiving negative feedback, she re-examines her work and methods to determine any areas that need improvement, and this is what most any of us would hope for. The problem comes with malicious and unsupported bad reviews, posted simply to do harm. Having done no wrong, one may still bear the brunt of hyper-ventilated postings rising to the top, impugning the reputation of a perfectly good business person. I remember at least two personalities at FPN who engaged in this practice. Once that starts, it is hard to turn it back.

Again, this is all in search of a (potentially) valid, workable feedback model to use on FPG.

Susan3141
July 5th, 2013, 05:02 PM
As a person who once used this forum to complain about a seller, I have a few thoughts.

1. The post in the forum did have the nice effect of getting the seller's attention after he refused to make things right via email with me.
2. The post did not, however, have enough leverage to get the seller to actually fix the problem.
3. The post may have caused the few people who read it to avoid the seller, which is the point of negative market feedback (to protect potential buyers from being cheated or mistreated).
4. But, since the post title did not include the seller's name, its usefulness is limited. Only people who actually read the posts in market feedback would get the benefit.

Personally, I think the best solution would be to have a seller rating system, like on eBay and Amazon that allows a buyer to rate the seller and the seller to develop a "reputation". Of course the seller could respond to negative feedback. It would all be public (but between buyer and seller only) and people could then decide whether or not to buy from a seller based on his/her rating. Had I seen such feedback on my seller, I never would have purchased from him.

Unfortunately, I suspect such a system would be a nightmare for the moderators to put in place. I've no idea what sort of coding it would require. But, it might be easier, in the long run, than having to moderate a forum filled with angry people. I realize there are positive market feedback posts, but the negative ones seem to bring out the worst in many posters, whether they are involved in the original issue or not.

Just a possibility. Every time I see a pen for sale by that seller, I wish I could warn people not to buy from him. And since others had negative experiences with him, it seems a rating system would be a big red flag against disreputable sellers like him.

Jon Szanto
July 5th, 2013, 05:34 PM
Personally, I think the best solution would be to have a seller rating system, like on eBay and Amazon that allows a buyer to rate the seller and the seller to develop a "reputation". Of course the seller could respond to negative feedback. It would all be public (but between buyer and seller only) and people could then decide whether or not to buy from a seller based on his/her rating. Had I seen such feedback on my seller, I never would have purchased from him.
It isn't restricted to sellers only, but have you noted that each Member's Profile page has a section for Feedback? Possibly this is an area that can be used a bit more in these instances, but at the moment you have to know to look at the profile page. I wonder if Feedback ratings could be programmed to show in the avatar info at the left of each post?

dannzeman
July 5th, 2013, 06:12 PM
Personally, I think the best solution would be to have a seller rating system, like on eBay and Amazon that allows a buyer to rate the seller and the seller to develop a "reputation". Of course the seller could respond to negative feedback. It would all be public (but between buyer and seller only) and people could then decide whether or not to buy from a seller based on his/her rating. Had I seen such feedback on my seller, I never would have purchased from him.
It isn't restricted to sellers only, but have you noted that each Member's Profile page has a section for Feedback? Possibly this is an area that can be used a bit more in these instances, but at the moment you have to know to look at the profile page. I wonder if Feedback ratings could be programmed to show in the avatar info at the left of each post?
I just updated the iTrader software to show the feedback score for this forum.

AndyT
July 5th, 2013, 06:26 PM
Another poster has mentioned googling for "Carneil Pens" (as I did before using his services). My negative feedback features in the results. On the same page of results, another costumer is "mightily pleased" with a MB146 bought from Carneil Pens.

If, when you first looked up Carneil pens, the fourth and fifth items on the search return were headed "The worst workmanship I've yet encountered: Carneil Pens", would you have even bothered to visit their website? Maybe; I doubt I would - probably wouldn't even have made it to the tenth item about the Montblanc. You can put that down to a lack of intelligence on my part if you like, but in my opinion that's the way the internet works, and the growth of the online reputation management service sector suggests that I'm right.

Deb
July 5th, 2013, 10:17 PM
The intention of this forum is not to act as a court and decide one party guilty or innocent. The intent is for people to be able to share their experiences, good or bad, so that others can make an informed decision about who to buy from or send their pens to.

If this forum is to act as a venue where accusations are made and defended against, it must take on some of the aspects of a court. At the very least, it must ensure that unjust harm is not done. If that cannot be assured, then this becomes a dangerous and irresponsible undertaking and it would be far better not to do it at all.

HughC
July 5th, 2013, 10:53 PM
One person's bullshit is another person's considered opinion. Life is full and varied.

Bloody hell !! You're starting to sound like an Aussie .....but my dear friend in this world of "political" correctness and "gender" correctness may I point out a bull is male, a cow is female....this means men "bullshit" and women "cowshit" about whatever...:puke:

On a more serious issue, Deb raises a valid point. Really at best a forum that encourages dialogue between the parties is about as far as it should go, and can go.

Regards
Hugh

Flounder
July 6th, 2013, 06:55 AM
Another poster has mentioned googling for "Carneil Pens" (as I did before using his services). My negative feedback features in the results. On the same page of results, another costumer is "mightily pleased" with a MB146 bought from Carneil Pens.

If, when you first looked up Carneil pens, the fourth and fifth items on the search return were headed "The worst workmanship I've yet encountered: Carneil Pens", would you have even bothered to visit their website? Maybe; I doubt I would - probably wouldn't even have made it to the tenth item about the Montblanc. You can put that down to a lack of intelligence on my part if you like, but in my opinion that's the way the internet works, and the growth of the online reputation management service sector suggests that I'm right.

In that scenario, I can honestly say, yes I would have visited their site. Wouldn't you have been curious too? On the mirror side of your argument, when I googled "Carneil Pens" and saw nothing awry, I didn't abandon my information search and automatically choose them for this work. I read what Onoto had to say. I emailed Carneil Pens, noted Peter Crook's engineering background, browser their site, noted the highly fp-specific tools he had invested in, and judged whether or not to trust him with my vintage pen on that basis.

pajaro
July 6th, 2013, 09:12 AM
I hae read this thread, mainly because I was rather shocked by it. I am not generally a confrontational person, so when I recently bought a secondhand Sonnet for $100, the blue and silverplate special edition, and it didn't write, I just replaced the feed, even though I strongly suspected the seller knew it had issues. I also ordered a replacement nib for $53. I had been tempted to send the pen back, but I liked it. I have made many purchases from pen people where I just sucked up some minor defect or a totally hosed pen. The cap in question is not mine, of course, but I think the best that can come from this is a pyrhic victory.

Sometimes, as with the Sonnet, I get sufficiently put out that I wouldn't give the seller the satisfaction of remedying an issue. Leave them five star feedback they know they don't deserve, and bleep them. There isn't enough contempt in the world, but I just keep moving on. Feedback seems to me to be one of those things that is totally corrupted anyway. I don't believe the good or the bad. It's like the Air Force evaluation system. Everybody walks on water, until some unfortunate encounters a rating officer who thinks honesty is even wished for, and tubes someone's career with an attempted honest rating that is one tiny level below walks on water. This is not an honest world, but one where between the lines is all important.

Inginkpen
July 6th, 2013, 10:41 AM
I think it's important to have market feedback. I was burned by a pen repair person. It is difficult to cope with the disappointment of having someone provide poor service. A forum where you can talk about what happened and get advice on how to avoid trouble or approach a like situation from people who've been through similar situations is helpful.

Jon Szanto
July 6th, 2013, 10:56 AM
And, conversely, it can be a place where people share their stories of stellar work done, and recommend repair/restoration people who have given great service and treated the pens as their own. I somehow think this is the higher number, but the horror stories get all the headlines.

Laura N
July 6th, 2013, 03:08 PM
And, conversely, it can be a place where people share their stories of stellar work done, and recommend repair/restoration people who have given great service and treated the pens as their own. I somehow think this is the higher number, but the horror stories get all the headlines.

But in fact, the first sentence is exactly right. I look at the first page of the Market Feedback Forum, and there are 18 feedback posts. Of which 15 are glowing "thumbs up" threads. Only three report negative experiences. And in those three, the comments in many cases support the vendor.

I don't get all the fuss. Someone had a bad experience and factually reported it. The repair person didn't even bother to respond on the forum, though many others took his side. Why people are so upset that this is being discussed, I can't understand.

I can't think of a product, service or profession that is not subject to "feedback" and "ratings" on the internet. Amazon asks people to rate books; Goulet asks people to rate inks and pens. Sometimes feedback can be negative. Sometimes it can be unfair, one-sided or even rude. That too happens. Which is why everyone reads these things skeptically.

And in fountain pen world, particularly, people seem to bend over backwards to be fair and to give second chances. I really see little evidence of torches, pitchforks and burned-out businesses. Of course, we should all acknowledge the danger and strive to be fair. I just think that's already here.

My input: keep this forum the same. Let people post their experiences, honestly and fairly, with the knowledge that they are as likely to be questioned as to be thanked. Sunshine is the best disinfectant; free and respectful discussion the best atmosphere. Who does silence protect? Not good vendors and not customers. I read the original thread; I sympathize with the OP; but were I in the UK, I wouldn't cross the repair person off my list based on that thread.

TSherbs
July 6th, 2013, 08:43 PM
What "community input" is being sought here? (question refers to the thread title)
We want to hear your thoughts and ideas on the issue. What do you think?

This thread is virtually incomprehensible to me. I tried. Really did. I think generally this is something about feedback on deals made via the internet. Whatever, blast away. Buyer AND seller beware. Way it goes. Internet business is business with strangers, and little recourse. Risky business.

oldstoat
July 15th, 2013, 03:12 PM
If negative feedback is not allowed then this simply becomes a claque of sycophants. Something similar has happened on FPN where certain repairers and pen companies cannot be criticised. All one ends up with is gushy praise. Here, I see lots of people being praised, and a few being criticised. The thread on Engeika was helpful-the balance of opinion was "the prices are low, so don't expect perfection" Other critical threads may seem one sided but should stay. There is nothing stopping another customer giving a different point of view, and as adults we should be able to reach our own conclusions.

kenmc
July 25th, 2013, 10:57 AM
If negative feedback is not allowed then this simply becomes a claque of sycophants. Something similar has happened on FPN where certain repairers and pen companies cannot be criticised. All one ends up with is gushy praise. Here, I see lots of people being praised, and a few being criticised. The thread on Engeika was helpful-the balance of opinion was "the prices are low, so don't expect perfection" Other critical threads may seem one sided but should stay. There is nothing stopping another customer giving a different point of view, and as adults we should be able to reach our own conclusions.
AMEN!
I would add that in answer to the title - we would only need input from persons that have an experience with the company or product! Two good examples of helpful feedback are iPhone apps and Amazon products. People that haven't bought the items don't post feedback or jump all over someone that has because they said something negative. I wonder how many people defended Mr. Crooks in Flounder's post that never did business with him? Let him defend himself! If he doesn't attend our forum, oh well - his loss!

AndyT
July 25th, 2013, 11:18 AM
I don't recall anyone defending Mr Crook (sic). Nor do I recall any of those who were so quick to condemn his workmanship, name and appearance saying that they'd done business with him.

As for "we would only need input from persons that have an experience with the company or product", I agree wholeheartedly.