Site Forum

A couple of things first, I know there is a disclaimer on transactions that we're on our own if we wish to use the site for that, and I know that we can block individual members from sending us trades. 

However, I believe if a member can be blocked from the site's forum due to his belligerence and how it affects the overall TCDB atmosphere, then I believe Admin should block members who scam and/or have built up negative feedback due to stiffing numerous members in transactions. I have three transactions that I have not received - on one the member has reached out several times and is attempting to make right the trade, another the member is ghosting various other members including me on a trade that is now 2 months old, but is checking in daily, and the last one is from a member notorious for screwing up trades yet posts his mailings which for me is a slap in the face of those who have yet to receive anything in months (mine is going on 3 months next week).

I sent in a New Feature request to add a temporary block on members who are scamming or ghosting other members in transactions, and nothing's come of it. It's been about three weeks if I recall correctly. My proposal was basically to deny the trading/selling function until all the transactions are made right.

Reading this thread today spurred me to post about the feature as I believe a disclaimer is fine but allowing abuse of membership cannot enhance the TCDB atmosphere any more than allowing forum posts that tick people off.

I think it would be beneficial to also be able to weed out traders who have not logged in for years. For example, I use the "recent matches" feature a bunch. It sucks when I find some good matches and find out the person has been inactive since 2018.

"My proposal was basically to deny the trading/selling function until all the transactions are made right."

That makes a lot of sense to me, Sportscommish. It would take some individual effort on Admin's part to review and monitor each case, but hopefully the cases would be few and far between. And if the scammer never makes the transactions right, then their trading/selling function could just remain blocked.

Is there a link to your New Feature request? I'd submit a vote for that one.

I totally agree with the proposal as we have seen too many scammers especially of late on the site.  I will add though that in this highlighted example, the person making the offer was brand new to the site and had 0 feedback. Personally, I would not have engaged with this person for any sort of transaction involving $$ and if in trade, I would have asked that the cards I was to receive came first before sending anything out. I am a trusting person but someone who joins the site and their first post is offering a steal of a deal will not have my trust.

I'll be happy to vote for that one, too!

Unfortunately, it has not been approved as a legitimate New Feature proposal so we cannot support it as such.

I agree there should have been a more prudent approach with the new member, and this would apply to an "established" scammer and not anticipate such a lowlife.

Perhaps a few members could he publicly vetted by Admin as the mediators to clear people once banned? Meaning, Admin decides who is banned but a third party could clear a person once all trades are made right?

Several years ago, I put in a New Feature Request about this.  

"Can all member's lists be hidden (from all reports and cannot be view by anyone) if they are not active for 6 months (what Admin figure is good).  As soon as the member logs in the lists would be seen by everyone."  Kind like an on/off switch:  It is on until you do not log in for said time when it goes to off mode.   When you log in the swatch is on again.

He did not accept the New Feature Request and stated you can always look at the last logged in date.  Yes I understand.

I also asked for a new Feature Request about being able to see who are the scammers and poor traders.  Again, it went nowhere.  He stated that is what the feedback is for.  I do not remember how I stated it but was something about a mark by their name to check their feedback before a trade.

I'm being ghosted a lot more now days on messages that I send out.

brodiescomics wrote:

I think it would be beneficial to also be able to weed out traders who have not logged in for years. For example, I use the "recent matches" feature a bunch. It sucks when I find some good matches and find out the person has been inactive since 2018.

Ron, that's certainly a great suggestion. When I submitted the proposal, my aim was to temporarily ban any member from initiating anymore transactions if they'd received multiple negative feedback within a time frame, and not necessarily based on one incident, and let me stress it was temporary until each was righted. It would require reporting the member to Admin not having Admin monitor the site's transactions, but still Admin's obvious authority to implement the ban.