Criteria for MM access has changed.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Good move IMO, although I haven't used MM in a while I've always found it a great place to buy/sell things. Hopefully this will keep it that way :)
 
Probably a good move! And I'm pleased you didn't revoke access for those that had already made it but had < 1000 posts. ;)

I find the struggle between scammers and honest buyers/sellers (and moderators!) quite interesting and I often wonder what techniques would be most effective for stopping scammers.

In this case you have increased the "familiarity" and "time investment" requirements -- any potential scammer has to expose more of his personality (through his contributions to the forum) and he also to has invest a significant amount of time.

In an ideal world, what other techniques would you deploy?

Do you think "address verification" would be effective? Each user is sent a unique ID by post which they must enter into Trust (or similar system), thus confirming that they can be reached (if not, live at) a particular address.

You could also do a similar thing with landline phone numbers?

Is the biggest problem with scammers that you can't find out who they really are (and where they live), or is that you know where they live but you just can't get your money back?
 
Last edited:
Chasser said:
I've never had a problem in MM, and have accumulated a healthy Trust rating, so I count myself as one of the lucky ones. However, as a spectator I have seen some proper scams and deals go west over the years. :(

Building Trust is the thing, and new members have to start at the bottom. With the new rules (and if people continue to follow the guidelines in the sticky regarding conducting deals) the scenario where the buyer demands the goods sent first because the seller has no Trust rating should be a thing of the past. I've never agreed with that, although I can see why it happens.

Lastly, I've had some real bargains from the MM and will continue to sell my old or replaced kit in there. Long may it continue. :cool:
Click to expand...

Hear Hear! Well said.
 
Something like, has purchased at least one thing from OCUK would be good. then you would have their billing address if some serious scamming went down.
 
RickST said:
Something like, has purchased at least one thing from OCUK would be good. then you would have their billing address if some serious scamming went down.
Click to expand...

Yes, that would be another way of performing address verification. But again, is knowing the address of the scammer the main problem? I suppose it might be for a "selling" scammer.
 
Good idea Rick. I was hoping to be able to use the MM soon but I can't complain as I'd rather wait and use it when it's more trusted. You could have all delivery needs to be tracked postage as well and upload or send a photo of the receipt.
 
Vimes said:
But by not doing that couldn't it mean that the very people who have raised the concerns enough for the change to be implemented are still going to be there to trade, unless they have been dealt with separately and had their access removed...?
Click to expand...

I'd imagine they would be dealt with separately, rather than locking them out and then letting them do it again when they have 1000 posts. No sense taking members' access away and causing ill feeling. Not just saying that because it would remove my access, I could quite easily make another 72 posts to get access again if that did happen, it just seems more logical not to.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom