[N4n0]Buss Ban

This is exactly why:
1. Disputes shouldn't be handled by the staff member who banned "disputing user" . Disputes should be a chance at a second look, by a new set of eyes.

2. Staff should still make public reports and getting another staff's input BEFORE a ban is placed.




http://www.sythe.org/denied-suggestions/1575492-suggestion-about-user-snipe-another-customer.html

Above is N4N0 denying a suggested rule for EXACTLY what OP was banned for.

Good catch, and I agree that ban disputes should be handled by someone other than the person who issued the ban initially. That would remove any negative bias towards the user that could effectively determine the persons subsequent status.

 

[penman2k7]

Good catch, and I agree that ban disputes should be handled by someone other than the person who issued the ban initially. That would remove any negative bias towards the user that could effectively determine the persons status.

It's annoying that even though with these kind of posts it doesn't stop blatant tyranny. These changes NEED to happen.

 

It's annoying that even though with these kind of posts it doesn't stop blatant tyranny. These changes NEED to happen.

Changes are definitely needed, but with the current structure of staff, I don't see it happening. There is a directive when you're placed on staff. It's rare that you will see two staff members sharing conflicting opinions after the precedent has been set by a higher ranking staff member. It resembles the hierarchy of the police force, which is why it's corrupt. I'm not sure if it would affect the mod score system that's in place, which also could be a reason of nothing changing. Who knows, a miracle could happen.

 

If i had a gold shop i would be genuinely shaken if i knew someone were to pm every single customer that has posted on my thread. It is just not okay in my opinion to do that. It brings out a new dynamic to the market if this were to be allowed, think about it: Every single gold shop would now pm a customer, he would be flooded with 30 pms just cause he posted on someone's thread being interested in THEIR service.

When that is said, it is a free market, and there are no rules against it.

 

If i had a gold shop i would be genuinely shaken if i knew someone were to pm every single customer that has posted on my thread. It is just not okay in my opinion to do that. It brings out a new dynamic to the market if this were to be allowed, think about it: Every single gold shop would now pm a customer, he would be flooded with 30 pms just cause he posted on someone's thread being interested in THEIR service.

Ethically it's wrong, but it's a major aspect of business relations.

Example: There is a new phone company store called cricket that opened right next to a metropcs store near me. The new phone company has a deal going which involves "customer poaching". If you're in a contract with any other phone company (metropcs, t mobile, sprint, etc), they will give you $100 in tax rebate for switching over to them.

I could name many examples which essentially describes the unethical competitive nature of the market. Regardless of whether or not it's ethical, it wasn't against any rules, which is why the ban was uncalled for.

 

[S]

Banning people for making a proactive effort towards their business/out competing their competition, however unethical (but legal), is silly - especially on a free market forum. Don't know why he was banned for it, but any-who, he's now unbanned and Richard has made clear it's allowed.

 

[Pain]

For the record, PMing customers from other people's sales threads is not against the rules.

Sythe is run as a market economy, which functions on the free exchange of offer and acceptance.

We do not interfere in any way with people's ability to make an offer or acceptance in formation of a contract. The only time an offer is not allowed is if the offerer is posting on someone else's sales thread. The sales thread is considered their private domain for their staff and their customers only.

*If customer poaching becomes illegal you should be banning every pepsi advertisement that advertises to someone drinking a can of coke.


It's as simple as that, no drama no long explanation.

The world is filled with these in your every day life you just have to take the time to consider some of them, It may be unethical on Sythe but couldn't you argue a pepsi advertisement to someone drinking a can of coke is as well? Their making money off potential customers and coke drinkers just as I was off Rsps.


Which is why I think I was unbanned, It's just how markets are run now, ethics unfortunately no longer have such a strong place in business, if competition(me) can undercut a bigger player(lalapo) then I'm most certainly going to inform his customers about it, that's just how business is ran and it's a free market.

 

This is why:
1. Disputes shouldn't be handled by the staff member who banned "disputing user" . Disputes should be a chance at a second look, by a new set of eyes.

Generally this does happen and should've happened here too.

 

[penman2k7]

Generally this does happen and should've happened here too.

Why not make it a general rule then?

 

For the record I also do not think it's unethical in business to make someone a better offer. It's just a regular and healthy part of market competition.

If sellers are worried about poaching then they should do what major retail outlets do: Offer a standing price-beat guarantee.

 

[Superfluous]

For the record I also do not think it's unethical in business to make someone a better offer. It's just a regular and healthy part of market competition.

If sellers are worried about poaching then they should do what major retail outlets do: Offer a standing price-beat guarantee.

Yes, absolutely. However, there are problems with that. Without getting too long winded, assume someone is selling something for $85, and another person offers them $80. The first ($85) guy has a price-match guarantee. However, the buyer feels a sense of satisfaction in getting a "better deal," and $80 feels like enough of a good deal that the buyer is persuaded to take his business elsewhere even though the first guy has a price-match guarantee. Even if the first guy offered $75, the buyer might a) feel suspicious of the first guy because he's cutting his price so much, and b) not feel as good about saving the second $5 as he did about feeling the first $5 and go elsewhere. Granted, this is a little exaggerated, but the time/emotional costs of shopping around online in a marketplace like Sythe aren't the same as those in real life. Nonetheless, I agree with you; it shouldn't be a bannable offense.

 

Yes, absolutely. However, there are problems with that. Without getting too long winded, assume someone is selling something for $85, and another person offers them $80. The first ($85) guy has a price-match guarantee. However, the buyer feels a sense of satisfaction in getting a "better deal," and $80 feels like enough of a good deal that the buyer is persuaded to take his business elsewhere even though the first guy has a price-match guarantee. Even if the first guy offered $75, the buyer might a) feel suspicious of the first guy because he's cutting his price so much, and b) not feel as good about saving the second $5 as he did about feeling the first $5 and go elsewhere. Granted, this is a little exaggerated, but the time/emotional costs of shopping around online in a marketplace like Sythe aren't the same as those in real life. Nonetheless, I agree with you; it shouldn't be a bannable offense.

All I'm hearing is "I don't differentiate myself from other market players sufficiently that customers can tell the difference between my service and some random who PMs them."

 

So I've been on all ends of this and I don't see it as an issue.

I've pm'd other people's customers to advertise my service and I've offered them a time guarantee (which in my market is invaluable). Sometimes it's worked and sometimes it hasn't, it just depends on if the customer wants to save time or money.

I've had some customers that I've been in a skype conversation with PM'd and they've told me that someone else offered to beat my price and unless I match it they'll go with them. I wished them the best of luck as I don't compete on price.

And I've also been the customer, usually when swapping gp. I try to always trade with Zuzel or Slash unless I can find a better rate that they can't match or if they're not in stock. If I find a better rate I accept it since newer members often have better rates and are willing to go first to me.

It's just a healthy part of the market. It's saved me time & effort as a customer. As a seller it's a little annoying but I differentiate myself from them on quality so that I don't have to compete in price wars. I suggest you do something similar if your customers are being targeted.

 

[R2Pleasent]

All I'm hearing is "I don't differentiate myself from other market players sufficiently that customers can tell the difference between my service and some random who PMs them."

Where does the line stop with sending out PM's? If you are consistently advertising your service through use of the private messaging system, aren't you spamming?

Look at it this way. If people were posting their emails on other people's threads, and I went out and sent them email advertisements for my company, that would be illegal under the CAN-SPAM Act.

So where is the line drawn here? Can people send out 500-1000 PM's a day? What if they automated that process?

 

[kmjt]

Seems like the big sellers are upset because someone new comes in and takes initiative? It is fair game if everyone can do it... Stop being lazy and do it yourself lol. I used to PM people all the time when I was new here. This is nothing different then extracting a Facebook page's likes and using those profiles in your custom audience for Facebook advertising. Its advertising.

 

Where does the line stop with sending out PM's? If you are consistently advertising your service through use of the private messaging system, aren't you spamming?

Look at it this way. If people were posting their emails on other people's threads, and I went out and sent them email advertisements for my company, that would be illegal under the CAN-SPAM Act.

So where is the line drawn here? Can people send out 500-1000 PM's a day? What if they automated that process?

Not necessarily. Spamming in what way? Continuously through the same person? If I send 1 pm to 10 different people, would you consider that spamming?

According to the site rules, it would be against the rules to harass others after being told to stop.

Users will receive 1 infraction for the following:

Partaking in behaviour intended to disturb or upset another user

 

If you mass-PM everyone with your link or website or an advertisement/offer then I would say that's grounds for an infraction at least. But targetting individuals who you can see are looking for gold and offering them your price and product is just business.

 

Too much grey area here, needs to be hashed out by staff.

I think a lot of people don't know how open markets work. "Poaching" doesn't really exist -- everything is fair game until the moment the sale is done.

 

[Punjabi3]

Spamming can easily be solved by adding a limit on how many people someone can pm at a time. If somebody wants to take the time out to pm 500-1000 people a day I'd say they deserve the business because the competitor who the buyer/ seller wanted to deal with can just as easily match the service if they wanted to. Also advertising by pm to the whole forum is a lot different than just messaging a person who is already seeking a service and implied their interest to the public.

 

We'll address PM spamming if it becomes a serious issue but I don't think we have many standing complaints at this time.