Policy on new members selling things

[Cajunrider]

Agreed.

I like seeing members offering things here first to “keep it in the family”, but don’t appreciate new people showing up only to take advantage of the community by trying to sell without otherwise participating.

My sentiment exactly.

 

[jszg]

Reaction score might be more useful than post count. It's very easy to run up into the hundreds with vacuous comments, a little more challenging to garner more reactions.

 

[ShadyStump]

Wow do we get awfully fil-also-fickle about these discussions.

A couple ideas that both revolve around the idea that the less scrupulous you are the more you tend towards easy marks.

If we as users simply agree that all selling posts NOT in the appropriate sub-forum are to be reported, that alone will do more than just about anything else. When this happens, the thread can be locked, a canned message stamped to repost in the proper section, and left at that. Only serious sellers will go through the trouble of reposting; frauds will fear they've been caught and get out. I feel that self-policing as a community is the most practical way to handle things.

Another protection to add to that which takes a small effort on @Bonsai Nut's part and is yet to be mentioned is to keep the buy/sell section off the front page feed. You can only see it if you're looking for it, which cuts down on impulse buys, and a fraudulent seller's potential audience.
I dislike this idea myself because even if I'm not buying seeing the threads of sellers as they pop up gives me the ability to casually keep an eye on the market, which benefits all of us when it comes to fraudulent sellers. Segregating the sellers also segregates the rest of us from the knowledge that helps us identify nerdowells.
Just thought I'd bring this concept up.

Overall, my vote is for a 30 day wait to sell on the forum, and all selling posts must be in the proper section. Along with the current standard of 10 post minimum to DM (because you're not likely to buy or sell without some DMs) I think creates allot of protection actually. A note in bold bright letters can be added to the new thread composition screen. It'd be annoying to look at for some regulars, but gives no excuse for not knowing the standard, then the rest is on us. Only needs to be a couple lines in bullet points.

 

[dbonsaiw]

I agree with a lot of what has been said. This is generally supposed to be a forum for sharing bonsai information. That said, I very much appreciate the various trees and pots offered for sale here by people we are often communicating with. Frankly, I would love to see more being offered so I don't have to go looking. It's probably also not so easy to make a buck in the bonsai industry, so it's nice to keep it within the BNut community. Common sense should prevail - personally, I would only buy from people (on this site and elsewhere) that I feel somewhat comfortable with. A reaction score can give users additional information and I trust a seller would be collectively roasted if they tried to take advantage.

 

[delta6]

I agree that there should be rules. The 30-day rule seems fair. Minimum number of post is good as well although I feel like for someone who just wanna sell, they're probably just gonna spam/troll just to get the minimum number. Maybe it'll be a great idea too to mark legit sellers with "verified" tag or something. That way, the community (new and old) would easily know that they're dealing with legitimate seller and they won't get scammed.

Another thing to consider (maybe down the road) is to have an investigating body because for sure people will somehow complain against a legit seller and we don't want them to lose their status easily just because of some unruly customers. So having a thorough investigation on the matter should help either the buyer or the seller. But it is still early so I suppose we don't need this right now. It's just a thought.

 

[vancehanna]

I agree with the time factor as well as number of posts. Yet my feelings are why not have a charge or 'tax' that actually goes to bonsai.nut? I know many would be upset with me but hey, it is costly to run this site and I would not hesitate to pay 5-10% fee for such service. It might be too much for bonsainut to monitor or having to run it through their 'account' but it is a thought.
Honesty is the final answer and as Keith Scott told me over 50yrs ago in Chagrin Falls, OH (Went down to his place to see his incredible collection God Rest his Soul) ( I bought a small tree from him)

"Bonsai people are all honest, you don't need to show me your drivers license or write it on the check Vance," Keith Scott

But I guess that today, things have changed VH

 

[Thetradingtree]

I think a verification process would be a great place to start. I can personally vouch for billsbayou Great dude.

 

[Paradox]

I like seeing members offering things here first to “keep it in the family”, but don’t appreciate new people showing up only to take advantage of the community by trying to sell without otherwise participating.

This is how I feel as well so Id agree with a combined post count and time.
I like that people can sell things here to others but I like to know who is selling and we get that when people participate

 

[BrightsideB]

I found bonsai here when searching terms about tree health because I was doing bonsai without knowing lol. Pretty sad lol but am glad this site exists!

3 years later got deep into ceramics and have people here who support my work financially and many others who are very encouraging supporting in other ways.

I agree on a more robust system of some kind to keep scammers from ripping people off. I remember what happened to Cajun but that was like a reverse rip off were someone came to buy and actually never pay.

I think verification of some kind for people who have business in bonsai is a good idea. A hobbyist looking to unload tools or trees will be harder. Some sort of third party for large transactions is smart.

 

[delta6]

I found bonsai here when searching terms about tree health because I was doing bonsai without knowing lol. Pretty sad lol but am glad this site exists!

3 years later got deep into ceramics and have people here who support my work financially and many others who are very encouraging supporting in other ways.

I agree on a more robust system of some kind to keep scammers from ripping people off. I remember what happened to Cajun but that was like a reverse rip off were someone came to buy and actually never pay.

I think verification of some kind for people who have business in bonsai is a good idea. A hobbyist looking to unload tools or trees will be harder. Some sort of third party for large transactions is smart.

I don't know what happened there but how can someone buy and never pay? Like they took the plant and literally ran away with it? Was it like a gentlemen's agreement and the other just disappeared after?

 

[sorce]

I would hate to see one good person lose their, house, car, sanity, over the bad actions of someone else.
When that true desperation post from someone sincere comes, we'll make an exception.

Better to not be in the "making exceptions" place to begin with.

So, the seller must be here for x amount of days....

But the inactive buyer who gets took because they aren't here enough to pay attention needs protecting?

That doesn't make much sense.

Nothing wrong with learning the hard way.

Sorce

 

[The Barber]

Some other hobby forums in the past that I've been on, the sales forums don't even show up period until a forum member would hit a certain post count. Which helps weed those people out before they even attempt.

 

[Paradox]

Some other hobby forums in the past that I've been on, the sales forums don't even show up period until a forum member would hit a certain post count. Which helps weed those people out before they even attempt.

I agree this is a good way but anyone determined to try and sell something would just post it in general which we have seen already.
It would have to be made loud and clear that there should be no selling anywhere but the sales forums and those posts locked at minimum and deleted at best.

 

[The Barber]

I agree this is a good way but anyone determined to try and sell something would just post it in general which we have seen already.
It would have to be made loud and clear that there should be no selling anywhere but the sales forums and those posts locked at minimum and deleted at best.

Best part of those sales forums not showing up until a post count etc requirement is met is that scammers don't even know a sales forum exists unless they participate here for a while. I fully agree that no selling should be allowed outside of the sales forums, unless it is a special circumstance, such as an old development thread with a mention that it is for sale, with a link to the sale forum where all of that chat should be left for documentation, as well as in private messages. Can always pin a thread to the top where people can post about successful transactions, and admin can over time update the list of past sales that have been successful and just make a note next to user name of how many successful transactions they have had.

I just don't trust any new members that post for sale stuff, period, so I never really have an issue. Seen too many people scammed in all sorts of hobby forums, especially on Facebook sales pages, where most hobbies have entire pages devoted to calling out scammers.

 

[Kievnstavick]

To add to the discussion and concensus,

I think a 30-day "hold" period before being able to make a for sale post would help keep scammers away (except for the determined bunch) and hopefully reduce "bot" posts that are programed to wait the time period.

I do think a post limit is a little bit of a moot point as having one can prevent bots from just waiting while forcing interaction on the site for the actual humans. I can; however, see it punishing those who prefer to lurk or rarely posts. If BonsaiNut does implement a post limit to reach, I'd like to see it be a low number (like 10 or something) as a balance between preventing bots and preventing low-quality posting to reach the said limit.

I am not sure how it would work on the back end, but I'd propose monitoring online activity. Someone viewing the forum a few times a week (or month) is more believable to not be a bad actor than one that only accessed the site once before to create their account.

The trick is to make scamming on this site just enough effort to keep the majority away while not "gate-keeping" those who intend to use this site

 

[Michael P]

Once you get the hang of it, bot spotting is not difficult. There is a fake enthusiasm and a forced cheerfulness. And when they have a hallucination the nonsense is unmistakable. On APC we get some fairly sophisticated bots because there are many on-line aquarium sites that they can "learn" from. My guess is that bonsai would be a more difficult subject for them.

 

[thesven]

I think a verification process would be a great place to start. I can personally vouch for billsbayou Great dude.

As a newer member here with a low post count (but learning a ton), I wanted to share some observations based on my experiences in other communities and add onto this point. In many groups where buying and selling become regular activities, self-regulation often develops naturally. This typically involves members relying on referrals and fact-checking, which are openly encouraged within the community.

It’s fairly common for members to ask for verification or endorsements when dealing with an unfamiliar seller. While these conversations often happen privately, it’s not uncommon to see them take place publicly (such as the personal vouch above), depending on the situation. This process helps foster transparency, trust, and accountability.

I’ve also noticed that this approach is particularly common in communities centered around lifestyle, hobbies, collectibles, and similar interests. In these spaces, trust between members is key, and these practices can help build a safer and more supportive commerce environment.

I understand that in a community with a tight-knit core, honest on lookers and followers, and unfortunatly maybe some bad actors like this one, it might initially feel unnecessary or even off-putting. However, I’ve seen this approach work well in other communities when done respectfully, as it benefits both buyers and sellers in the long run.

Just thought I’d offer this perspective!

 

[Gabler]

As a newer member here with a low post count (but learning a ton), I wanted to share some observations based on my experiences in other communities and add onto this point. In many groups where buying and selling become regular activities, self-regulation often develops naturally. This typically involves members relying on referrals and fact-checking, which are openly encouraged within the community.

It’s fairly common for members to ask for verification or endorsements when dealing with an unfamiliar seller. While these conversations often happen privately, it’s not uncommon to see them take place publicly (such as the personal vouch above), depending on the situation. This process helps foster transparency, trust, and accountability.

I’ve also noticed that this approach is particularly common in communities centered around lifestyle, hobbies, collectibles, and similar interests. In these spaces, trust between members is key, and these practices can help build a safer and more supportive commerce environment.

I understand that in a community with a tight-knit core, honest on lookers and followers, and unfortunatly maybe some bad actors like this one, it might initially feel unnecessary or even off-putting. However, I’ve seen this approach work well in other communities when done respectfully, as it benefits both buyers and sellers in the long run.

Just thought I’d offer this perspective!

You look a lot like @rockm. I think it's the nose.

 

[rockm]

As a newer member here with a low post count (but learning a ton), I wanted to share some observations based on my experiences in other communities and add onto this point. In many groups where buying and selling become regular activities, self-regulation often develops naturally. This typically involves members relying on referrals and fact-checking, which are openly encouraged within the community.

It’s fairly common for members to ask for verification or endorsements when dealing with an unfamiliar seller. While these conversations often happen privately, it’s not uncommon to see them take place publicly (such as the personal vouch above), depending on the situation. This process helps foster transparency, trust, and accountability.

I’ve also noticed that this approach is particularly common in communities centered around lifestyle, hobbies, collectibles, and similar interests. In these spaces, trust between members is key, and these practices can help build a safer and more supportive commerce environment.

I understand that in a community with a tight-knit core, honest on lookers and followers, and unfortunatly maybe some bad actors like this one, it might initially feel unnecessary or even off-putting. However, I’ve seen this approach work well in other communities when done respectfully, as it benefits both buyers and sellers in the long run.

Just thought I’d offer this perspective!

Judging from the photo, obviously a person of refined taste and sharp intellect...