Vendor not delivering parts Part II

[THE TECH]

I think it just means if someone is new to the site they wouldn't be using this site to air their complaints. They would have to do what is presently done.....speak to the vendor and handle it directly. Not unreasonable in my opinion. Just like most things like this there will be no perfect remedies just better ones.

Actually this thread came about because of a customer not getting his calls/emails/etc returned so he was turning to the forum for help.

Why would you think that because someone might be new that they wouldn't be using this site to air their complaint? You don't have to be a member to view this site or buy from vendors. But maybe you are onto something with this. If the forum were only viewable to members, then you would have to be active on here to know what vendors were here in the first place to be able to purchase from them.

[DarkBuddha]

Yes , we do need a way to protect members from incompetent vendors ..
A vendor rating system would help.

Yes, or at least a vendor/seller feedback forum for such things in the Classifieds section. Such a forum would provide opportunity for both buyers and sellers/vendors to provide their side of the transaction experience. And because it would be in a separate section, it won't have the same visibility or presence on the forum as a whole except for those looking for such information or looking to engage in the conversation.

But , we also need a way to protect vendors from the one customer who slanders them without cause ..

Vendors do have ways to protect themselves: the law. Slander without cause is grounds for a lawsuit, as we all know. But consumers have very little recourse in the case of lousy customer service or poor product quality other than to complain and relay their experience to others. Not every criticism is slander. Not every public complaint is grounds for a lawsuit. And I do not think it is our place to determine or define those situations.

Now I don't know what the legal implications of hosting a forum in which slanderous threads appear, and I don't know how involved p-t.com wants to get involved in screening vendors' business practices. But if the official position is to allow vendors to promote products and services through the site with the status as an official site sponsor, then I think p-t.com does have some responsibility to its members to provide ways to provide feedback on the forum.

[1969CamaroRS]

Does having an account for a longer length of time mean that someone is more credible? Does that mean a new vendor would have the same lack of credibility?

I think the goal would be to prevent someone from just creating an account to flame a vendor either an ex-employee or someone trying to do so anonymously. At least a post count or account age would make this a little harder to do so, w/o something is trivially easy to do so.

Why not give sponsors a section to allow praise/criticism from customers when they decide to become a sponsor. The sponsors know ahead of time what it is used for and can address their customer related issues. Threads giving praise can be open for all to comment and threads related to negative issues with said sponsor can only be posted in by the OP and the sponsor. It would show no favortism while allowing the two sides to "air it out" if they choose to while hopefully correcting the problem.

Not a bad idea. Perhaps for a user to get posting rights to a vendor's area they need to show some type of proof of trying to reasonably resolve the issue (date and times of Phone calls etc, copy of receipt etc).

[parsonsj]

So if I have an issue and since I am new on the forum, that immediately discredits anything I might say against a vendor? So I shouldn't support vendors in fear that IF I had an issue and IF said vendor wasn't handling it properly, I would be summarily dismissed based solely on the fact of when I joined the forum??

You should look up the definition of a straw man argument.

The point is that how long someone has been around matters, especially when credibility/reputation is at stake. We don't allow folks to sell parts in the classifieds here until they have 50 posts; the idea being that the person is part of the community before selling stuff, and that should help reduce fraud.

[1badchevelle]

As in the past to many people jump on the bandwagon when their is a service issue or unhappy customer. Most resent that I can recall was a shoot at Frank at prodigy. I have been here long enough to know better and was glad to see a thread by the same person appologizing for his actions. We do not need that crap on this site.

To the OP why 1 year to speak up. This should have been brought up to a mod months ago to try and help out. That has been done in the past. If at that point nothing would have been resolved than yes a thread with the issue naming the sponsor would be acceptable. BUT no one else should be allowed to chime in until the said sponsor would have a chance to post his side.

[THE TECH]

You should look up the definition of a straw man argument.

The point is that how long someone has been around matters, especially when credibility/reputation is at stake. We don't allow folks to sell parts in the classifieds here until they have 50 posts; the idea being that the person is part of the community before selling stuff, and that should help reduce fraud.

Done as requested.

I am merely trying to give the current and potential customers out there more of a voice for disputes whether it be on this forum or another forum. It seems that the moderation here is more focused on the people who feed the site monetarily yet forget that without the membership here, there would be no vendors and hence no money to fund this site.

I do not disagree that there needs to be a fair way for both parties in a dispute to handle grievances. It just seems to me that the moderation here is only concerned with the vendors. And to be honest, I think that you being a vendor AND moderator is a conflict of interest.

What I have seen done on other forums is where both parties involved can post in a thread regarding the dispute without the interaction of the peanut gallery. It is easy for outsiders to get wrapped up in a thread that has nothing to do with them.

[parsonsj]

To the OP why 1 year to speak up. This should have been brought up to a mod months ago to try and help out. That has been done in the past. If at that point nothing would have been resolved than yes a thread with the issue naming the sponsor would be acceptable. BUT no one else should be allowed to chime in until the said sponsor would have a chance to post his side.

Right. I've mentioned this a couple of times now, and this option is available if someone has a complaint, right now.

To all, keep the ideas and comments coming. We appreciate the thoughtful and civil discourse.

jp

[parsonsj]

It seems that the moderation here is more focused on the people who feed the site monetarily yet forget that without the membership here, there would be no vendors and hence no money to fund this site.

I appreciate the comment, but I think your perception is wrong. None of the mods are paid. Larry runs this site at zero profit. We spend much more time dealing with members than with vendors, and our primary focus is technical support for members building pro-touring cars.

Please stick around; we have a lot to offer, and the members here are the best on the internet.

jp

[THE TECH]

I appreciate the comment, but I think your perception is wrong. None of the mods are paid. Larry runs this site at zero profit. We spend much more time dealing with members than with vendors, and our primary focus is technical support for members building pro-touring cars.

Please stick around; we have a lot to offer, and the members here are the best on the internet.

jp

I wasn't implying that anyone was paid personally.

I don't plan on going anywhere. I really like this site.

[JEFFTATE]

Thanks for all the comments.
This is truly a valid discussion.

[Damn True]

Done as requested.

I am merely trying to give the current and potential customers out there more of a voice for disputes whether it be on this forum or another forum. It seems that the moderation here is more focused on the people who feed the site monetarily yet forget that without the membership here, there would be no vendors and hence no money to fund this site.

I do not disagree that there needs to be a fair way for both parties in a dispute to handle grievances. It just seems to me that the moderation here is only concerned with the vendors. And to be honest, I think that you being a vendor AND moderator is a conflict of interest.

What I have seen done on other forums is where both parties involved can post in a thread regarding the dispute without the interaction of the peanut gallery. It is easy for outsiders to get wrapped up in a thread that has nothing to do with them.

I can recall no less than 5 vendors who have been ousted from that right-hand column due to shady business practices, ripping off members etc. It's happened a number of times I assure you. By the same token, there have been a number of individual members who have been banned for bad trading and making false statements about other members and vendors trading. A lot of it never gets aired out publicly.

The thing is, that its easy for someone with a beef (valid or not) to join for the express purpose of bashing a vendor. We've had groups of people from other forums join simply to pile on when they've been led to believe that "a buddy" has been somehow wronged. Far more often than not, they are armed with far less than 1/2 of the story. It's pretty easy for some random anonymous new guy to make a forum post and damage the reputation of a business. Anything posted on the web true or not, can be found. Google cache is a pretty powerful tool.

It's a tough issue. We are working on a solution that meets the needs of the membership and requires credible and factual proof of an issue in order to protect the vendors as well from malicious defamation.

[6'9"Witha69]

I want to just point out tat the Moderators here are not cronies of the site owner nor the vendors. They too are gearheads, building cars in garages, with budgets, and buying parts from the very vendors who sponsor here. I am sure they too would love to know who is crooked and who is not. But this is a double edged sword. Without vendors, the site isn't free and couldn't exist in it's current form. Without members, why would vendors bother spending time/money to sponsor. The mods are placed in a very tight spot. Trust me, I believe their allegiances are with us. They just are trying to keep the torch and pitchfork crowd from gathering, and burning the "witch". And again, the axe swings both ways. They also keep members from beating each other up verbally and bashing / tarnishing each others reputations.

It seems like they are trying to fulfill a need here, and it will be controlled and civil. Hell, we have a political forum here, and it is well moderated, and even the most extreme topics are kept civil and on point. Few thought that could be accomplished, but they did. Not without extra effort by these volunteers, but it did happen.

I too am in favor of rating systems, but not of what sometimes is bashing over buyer's remorse, lack of communication, lack of understanding, or plain or stupidity.

Sitting back to see what the mods come up with.

[trapin]

The volume of traffic this thread has received and the passion you’ve shown has really underscored the importance of the issue; understand we share your concerns and it will not go unanswered. Although it is true that we have a responsibility to the sponsors who pay good money to advertise here, this message board was first conceived to serve the hobbyist. The advertisers came later.

As the stewards of this board it is our responsibility to make sure that the sponsors who advertise here are trustworthy and remain a viable option for the members. However it is also our responsibility to make sure that the members are trustworthy as well. With that said, we can’t parade around here like police officers and mitigation referees for every situation that arises. At some point, something has to give.

So the simple way to solve all of this “in theory” is to make available a Vendor Rating System. Just as you would in eBay, if you had an unpleasant experience with a vendor you'd have the option to go into his "Trader Rating" and with proof of purchase (credit card statement, receipt, bill, etc) you can give him a rating and air your complaint. The vendor would then have the option of one rebuttal and that effectively ends our involvement in the matter. Further mitigation would revert back to the vendor and consumer off line.

Now…are we going to do this? Can we do this? We don’t know yet. As John and Jeff stated earlier, we’re hashing it out. Bear with us.

Thank you again for your civility. You guys are the best.

[critter]

Me, I'm watching because I moderate 2 other car forums. We deal with the same stuff. The best solution we've found is to take the original posting, create a new thread with that post and lock it to all users except the one who's complaining and the vendor. The old thread is deleted. An explanation from a moderator is appended to the original post. Then we PM both parties and tell them it's there in the wild, start talking to each other. They can do it in public or private but either way the thread needs a closing post, whatever they decide. This way we keep the pile on posts out of the equation and still give both the vendor and the buyer the opportunity for free and open dialog. Hope that helps some. If there's a better way, I'm listening.

[DarkBuddha]

Another thought... sometimes witnessing two sides hash out a conversation is useful for getting a context for the issues. I know I've been very impressed with Frank's (at Prodigy) conduct in and approach to dealing with the recent threads criticizing Prodigy. This actually made the exchanges valuable for me as a potential customer.

If a rating system was made available (as opposed to a sub-forum dedicated to buyer/seller feedback), I think the contact info for both buyer and seller/vendor should be available (i.e. for PMs or email). This would allow those that have further questions and/or inquiries the ability to gather more info and get a broader picture of the issues involved.

[XLexusTech]

All I know is when you can't get an email from a vendor but they are busy posting here its natural to take it to the forum ....
I find it insanely irritating when their too busy to respond to a call or email but got plenty of time to hype the newest thing for sale in one thread or another...

The Forum has a big responsibility on both sides.... I am not saying its easy.. but the scale sure seems tilted

[Chad-1stGen]

First. I agree with the line of thinking that this forum is a perfect place to discuss car and more specifically pro-touring related experiences. If that experience is good or bad related to a vendor on this site or not it should be allowed to take place.

Second. I don't think it is PT.com's job to do anything about it other than providing the forum for the discussion. If a site supporting vendor has a customer service screw up it's not the moderator or Larry's job to make it right. That is between the customer and vendor. If moderators or admin's choose to get involved that is their choice and shouldn't be a "right" or expectation of the forum members here.

My two cents...

EDIT: Don't forget mods & members, there are plenty of sites out there to offer ratings good or bad for vendors. I only recently learned just how much yelp, google, city search, etc are being used for automotive suppliers. As a consumer I find this invaluable. As a business owner I see how tough it can be. My long time friend owns a very sucessful automotive repair busieness. He has many positive reviews and 3 or 4 negative ones. He can remember each and everyone of those customers and all but one of them (having only heard one side of the story) sure don't seem fair. And on there he can't have a civil conversation like can happen here.

[absintheisfun]

How hard would it be to create a new topic where each Vender has their own subtopic under their name. It could be moderated by the vendor (putting the responsibility to control in their hands) the power to delete/lock the threads would lie in a neutral moderators hands.
It would give a single place for each vender to hear and discuss praise or issues with their customers on this site, as well as give forum members a place to direct specific praise and complaints for each vender they find on this site.

[Six_Shooter]

There definitely is a lot to consider here for a fair way to deal with both dealings gone wrong and dealings that went well, as a rating or solution system.

One thing I don't agree with is, I'm paraphrasing since I have company that just showed up, but that a sponsoring vendor would or could not know of a thread or response that was not in their favour.
I disagree. Any site sponsor should have an interest in making sure that any issues or praise that are posted on a site that they sponsor be answered.
If they don't actively come on here and peruse the site, or simply use the search engine to find comments about them, then a simple e-mail from a moderator, or even a member when a posts comes up would definitely get their attention. For something more serious, or based on a quick resolution a phone call from a moderator/admin might be something worth considering.

This is an interesting topic and one of few I've read word for word on here. I'll be keeping a watch and read on this one.

[Ishmael]

I'm blown away by two things here. 1. How dead on Critter's approach is. No need for a feedback score when there is a search function - buyer beware idea. Plus, if the vendor puts there name out there and profits by it, shouldn't they have the responsibility to answer?
2. Larry doesn't get paid. Can he be sainted for that?