Why dont you post bargains anymore ?

Mikinoz on 20/03/2010 - 10:35
Last edited 20/03/2010 - 11:01

Okay so i rarely post bargains on here anymore due to 2 main reasons below, i was wondering what are the reasons others may not be posting bargains anymore?

My reasons are ,

1) The site is transitioning and i am waiting on the curb to see how the voting etc is changed/amended
2) The main place i find bargains HT doesnt seem to have good bargains as frequently as before

I am sure others have reasons in regards to posting , would be glad to hear them

Please note this is not a discussion about recent events with Logitechshop BC Et all

Also note this is not having a go at ozbargain i really appreciate having a unique site like this its more an observation of trends and how the attitude is towards posting.

General Discussion

Comments

  • acidburn02 on 20/03/2010 - 11:12

    I love the site but I am hesitant to post anything, or refer people to here that aren't particularly internet savvy. At the moment, you could post a deal where a naked chick delivered free money to your door whilst fanning you with palm leaves and people are still going to neg you, or have a go at you.

    I know that's not particularly "tough" of me but it is the reason my partner left the site after posting one deal.

  • moo on 20/03/2010 - 13:09
    +6

    I have stopped posting deals too, I used to post quite a fair bit in the past. Main reason being is that the 'community' mob mentality takes over and ruins it. For example, sometimes users vote with their emotions, eg. 1 previous bad experience with the vendor, even though this current deal is a decent deal. I've been a member for a few years now, and have been this site grown and developed into what it is today, which has been an exciting journey.

    • Kranbone on 20/03/2010 - 14:23

      Exactly (couldn't agree more), vote for the deal on it's merits. But by all means if you have a personal experience, post it, but don't let it spoil/cloud the deal.

      EDIT: I try to be an active member and positive deals that I have no access to deals in Melbourne etc as a deal is a deal.

    • kelea on 20/03/2010 - 18:16

      I can see the benefits of people neg-ing a deal if their previous experience with the vendor is dodgy. I don't have time to read all comments so if I see a deal that I might be interested in with any negatives, I will take the time to search through the comments to find out why it was neg-ed.

      I guess my definition of 'dodgy' is more so if the vendor was at fault. If the customer was being unreasonable while still claiming a bad experience, and negs for that reason than, that is a different case.

    • Mazley on 22/03/2010 - 22:47

      I agree about the 1 bad experience clouding people. I mean, if someone is abhorrent, then fair enough (and please tell us all in your comments when you neg), but if someone has slow postage (read: takes a few extra days etc) or the communication isn't great, a comment without a vote tends to be enough, and this in turn encourages people to keep posting :D

  • marcusv on 20/03/2010 - 14:23

    By the time I discover a deal someone has already beat me to it and posted it.

    • scotty on 21/03/2010 - 02:42

      That would be my reason why I have not been posting as often as before. Some people are just too damn quick.

    • ESEMCE on 09/04/2010 - 14:57
      +2

      Ditto, I also often don't remember.. As a result I see deals and then think, "why didn't I think to do that!"

      • Crownie on 16/04/2010 - 00:51

        +1 to that.

    • SomeGuyOnOzB on 16/04/2010 - 15:58
      1. Others beat me to it
      2. I haven't seen as many things I felt were worth posting that weren't already posted
      3. I'm wary of suggesting something when some members might not be as aware of what to do to avoid or handle problems
      4. It can take a while for me, to list what I consider to be the major issues or points in regard to a deal.
      5. Limited spare time
  • Kranbone on 20/03/2010 - 14:25
    +4

    On a side note Mikinoz I've always appreciated your contribution to the community and it has been noted. I hope you don't leave :)

    • Mikinoz on 20/03/2010 - 18:21
      +1

      Thanks Kranborne, same for me i have learnt way to much about technology etc by reading yours and others comments and replies , helps me keep an open mind.

      And about the apples i had no idea :) i was thinking they were unbreakable , sorry to hear about that.

      • Kranbone on 21/03/2010 - 08:52

        That's the spirit of OzBargain :)

        In regards to Apple they probably are unbreakable for others, but for me, it was an absolute horror story and it's not like I abused mine at all. It just varies, what I just do is post my experience.

        Stay safe mate :)

        • punter1 on 21/03/2010 - 09:58

          wazz up with Apple ?

  • OzChick on 20/03/2010 - 14:34
    +2

    People are a bit harsh on here but I tend not to take anything posted on here too seriously, so I just post anyway. If people hate it then it will be removed. If someone has made use of the bargain then who cares if 10 other people think that it's stupid.

    I will endeavour to find fashion bargains. There are not enough of them on here.

    • scotty on 21/03/2010 - 02:47
      +2

      I will endeavour to find fashion bargains. There are not enough of them on here.

      I can't say that I am the experts in this department :) However my idea is that different departments/categories should be more independent. For example it would be more difficult for an Apparel offer to get to more than 50 votes than an electronics/computer offer.

      I am hoping to develop more category focused main page — so all the people who are just hunting for fashion bargains can stay in their preferred corner and still enjoy the full site. Still thinking about how to do it…

      • stumo on 23/03/2010 - 20:07

        I think doing this would be a major step in the right direction scotty.

  • inherentchoice on 20/03/2010 - 15:17
    +2

    +1 for this thread as it's good to get an idea of peoples attitudes to the issue. Although people can get disappointed when the 'community' doesn't necessarily agree that the bargain they found is a good deal, I think we should realise that can happen but not let it put us off from taking the 2 or so minutes to enter the title, description and link and press submit. Remember also that you can always update the details later.

    The worst that can happen is that your deal gets negs, but it was still a contribution to OzBargain. The whole of OzBargain is user submitted content. You could be surprised, like I was with the 3G netbook for $410.

    I agree that there's a lack of deals in some categories, as most of the deals are technology related. I guess it's easier to measure the value of technological goods and services as oppossed to a lot of other categories, but I suppose we don't want to restrict ourselves to technology too much either.

    Sometimes I've posted deals that I personally didn't think were good and I retracted my vote for my own deal, but I thought others might appreciate them(e.g. Reflex Copy Paper). I've even posted some things just as a test to see how many votes they would get.

    • SomeGuyOnOzB on 16/04/2010 - 16:03

      Domino's pizza has to be one of the weirdest things on the website.

      Many deals will get 100+ in the first day. But there are other deals, that at a glance looked the same, and only end up with under 10+ in the first day … along with comments about how people don't like the taste of Domino's …

      It leaves me puzzled …

  • inherentchoice on 20/03/2010 - 15:43
    +1

    …thought I should own up to hesitating to post this: $339 (after cashback) gets you a new 10” Acer netbook at Clive Peeters. Saw the ad in The Weekend Australian rag… I wouldn't buy it, but I might post it later unless someone beats me to it lol.

    Update: the deal is here: http://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/23442

  • neil on 21/03/2010 - 01:21
    +4

    Well, to answer the original question, agree with Marcus, by the time I find a bargain someone has beaten me to it. It's becoming a common occurrence where people post the same deal within seconds of each other. That's a good thing I guess but the sheer impact of the numbers we drive to these deals means a lot of the time, the item is unavailable.

    Its been an interesting journey. I think it started off as a vision of a site where intelligent bargain seeking individuals came to find and post bargains. Bargain was posted, some conversation, a polite thanks or no thanks and that was it. My favourite part of the moderating back in the day was voting for the weekly prize for best comment, whether useful or funny or whatever.

    But this site's greatness and community has drawn its popularity to the general masses where the once prestine holiday spots has been turned into chaotic tourist trap where the lawmakers need to constantly create rules and police have to keep their understaffed and overstressed patrols roaming the streets 24 hours a day. There are some lovely people in the community but there are also the drunks/crooks/illegal immigrants who have no respect for the police or this land.

    We ask that people don't put in the deal, something like "sorry this is my first deal" "please be nice" etc and I think thats because people are very quick to jump down peoples throat if the deal is not good. People take getting negative votes very very personally. I'll admit it still makes me upset when people neg my posts. So how do we get that great community positivity back? Or do we just accept this is the Internet and grow a thick skin to it all? I don't know but at the end of the day, we are all here to find bargains and I hope people remember that before they hit the comment button.

    • SomeGuyOnOzB on 16/04/2010 - 16:07

      I might revisit the Wiki one day. When I revised the deal posting guidelines, I meant to provide guidelines based on what people at the time were responding well too.

      But I didn't explain that in the Wiki.

      One thing we might need to emphasise is also that all work done on this site is pretty much volunteer work, done out of spare time between our own commitments, family, friends, studies, leisure etc

  • ChadHominem on 21/03/2010 - 02:33

    on occasion i haven't posted a bargain because well..i couldn't afford it at the time and if everyone abused it by buying 10 of the product each, then it would be sold out by the time i could afford it. =P

  • aussman on 21/03/2010 - 09:28

    in the current climate if its not logitech shop your deal gets voted down and the front page flooded with logitech shop deals. Surely there can be a forum thread or a single post rather than a new post every 12 hours.

  • Mazley on 22/03/2010 - 22:48
    +1

    Yeah, I'm just too slow off the mark (I swear I get all the juicy junk mail a day later than everyone on Ozbargain :P). I like to try and be more the cheerleader to the team (the team being the deal poster). Wish I had a better analogy to use, 'cause the idea of me as a cheerleader would give a lot of people nightmares :D

  • [Deactivated] on 23/03/2010 - 10:09
    +2

    As long time bargainers it's sometimes hard not to compare a deal with one that's past. The problem is that the past deal is no more, and the deal maybe the best that's on offer now. But this gets negged because its not better than the one that's no more.

    Also we are not the ones that make the deals. It's the retailers and they have their cycles. My partner works for a national retailer as a casual, and they don't have much work at present. But there are the transition sales coming up, end of summer, so probably more deals starting soon.

    And then again how many more mice, keyboards monitors TV's Set top boxes can I buy. And as one above pointed out I probably could vote for a deal even though I may not take advantage of it.

    Problem as a mod, is that I tend not to vote, so if a dispute comes up, I am not seen at taking action because I voted that way. As some here are very quick to judge.

    And like Marley points out, now that my "favourite" deal places are known, others are now on the same mailing lists and post ahead of me.

  • anarky on 23/03/2010 - 12:54
    -1

    I just don't see why so much emphasis is placed on a neg vote? It's not a big deal.

    • OzChick on 23/03/2010 - 16:14

      I agree. It's like the dislike button on Facebook.

      • neil on 23/03/2010 - 17:20
        +2

        Negative votes, can remove the deal from showing on the new deals page, extends the period of time until the next time the OP posts, and takes the page off of any Google results. For a normal user, probably not a big deal but for a merchant it may make a difference. Mostly though, OP's take it as an insult especially if there is no reason listed.

        • stumo on 23/03/2010 - 20:15

          Even if there is a good reason for a neg, you usually get a massive barrage of angst back, I've noticed an anti-neg vigilante type movement starting up.

          • [Deactivated] on 23/03/2010 - 21:59

            @stumo: Well I am not sure who is putting the most emphasis on the neg vote. It was just one part of my and others discussions here. The bulk of the reasons why I am not posting as I explained, is that i have shared my sources and others pick up the deals and now post new deals from these sources. The other is that its' not the season for deals end of financial year etc, and that when you dont need so much, as you have bought stuff already etc. Then there is the judgement on a deal based on deals which aren't as good as ones no longer available, which can put people off posting deals. So neg voting is only one part, not the whole part.

            Its reality, that when deals are negatively voted for the reasons I gave, like its not a "good" deal compared to those in the past, posters will learn from these comments, that deals need to be "great" or better than a previous one, so they don't post, which is what the neg voter is saying, they should do. Its no "big" issue its a comment that has an effect on the number of deals posted, that's all. Not saying it is a problem, just saying thats what happens, which is responding to the first post. Why people dont post?

            Many of the neg voters have mixed up the mods desire for an explanation, so people can understand why the negative, vote, with the belief we want to stop negative votes. Thats wrong. We can negative votes when the voter doesn't give a reason. We have had a number of trolls who have just voted negative for no apparent reason, which has given the negative vote a bad name. So asking for a reason actually reinstates the value of the negative vote.

          • Crownie on 16/04/2010 - 00:56
            +2

            @stumo: I tend to neg comments rather than deals.

            Honestly, the last deal I wanted to neg was one of the Logitechshop ones as they bundled the products for the savings and it just seemed to be too much logitechshop :D.

            I only neg deals if there is a cheaper alternative, the deal seems to be spam, or its a duplicate.

        • scotty on 23/03/2010 - 22:37
          +1

          Thanks to neil for listing out the "side effects" of negative votes. OzBargain is community-powered and quite a number of features are automated based on the votes — positive or negative. There have been talks about "getting rid of the negative votes", as it does have some negative impacts on the community.

          However some features still need negative votes to work correctly.

          • Automatic temporarily bans
          • Automatic removal from Google index (bad deals are not worthy to be listed on Google search results)

          We could also anonymise the negative votes, but then it makes neg-voters not accountable for their votes.

          I guess it's easy for you guys to say "hey that's scotty's problem" so while I am still thinking of a good solution, negative votes stay.

          I could just turn off negative votes for a week or two and see how it works out. How's that?

          • samfisher5986 on 23/03/2010 - 22:42
            +1

            @scotty: Besides helping you find a working system using the statistics, turning off negative votes would just be chaos.

          • [Deactivated] on 26/03/2010 - 21:19
            +2

            @scotty: Scotty with so many people now here, maybe the threshold can be increased to say 5. If the deal is "genuinely" bad vs bad for some people then its most likely it will get a lot more negative votes to make it go away. Maybe worth trying until we can get something better

            • Mikinoz on 26/03/2010 - 21:21
              +1

              @[Deactivated]: I think thats a great idea, until something better is devised :)

        • mason on 26/03/2010 - 12:15
          +1

          neil on 23/03/2010 - 16:20 ¶
          Negative votes, can remove the deal from showing on the new deals page

          Have to agree, posted deal yesterday which I felt was good price, and got a neg vote and an "agree" neg vote straight away. Did not want to argue the reason, but could have as was not quite comparing similar product or price (involved you "might" get discount). End result deal gone in 10 mins. So don’t see much point in posting when someone can remove it so easy.

          • scotty on 27/03/2010 - 21:07

            @mason: What's in the work is delayed removal. Say 6 hours so there will be enough people up voting if it is indeed a good deal. Unless something that is obviously wrong (duplicate, spam, or anything forbidden in the posting guide), then people ought to be using the Report button to have them removed.

            • slowmo on 28/03/2010 - 12:44
              +1

              @scotty: Might I suggest that the report link be moved to next to the + and - buttons? like a red flag? it would be more visible and relevant to the post.. imho.

  • slowmo on 27/03/2010 - 14:45

    Here's an idea…

    users have a pool of 'karma' of balance every month (say 0)

    every negative on a post subtracts 1 from the balance, every positive votes , adds 0.1 (with a cap of 2points/week)

    if a post that has more -ves than +ves (eg in cases where posts are removed or the percentage of -ves to +ves exceeds 50%), then the subtraction to karma is reinstated.

    if the post is a normal +100 and -5 (some minor arbitrary figure), the subtraction on karma stays

    if the karma falls below a figure (say -10/mth), we can conclude user has been trigger happy, a troll, and has nothing else to do but complain about posts. This user account will be banned from -ve any posts for the next month, and a 'karma ban' count would be added to keep a history on user.

    Each start of the month, the karma balance is reset to 0.

    this way, each user have to think hard before they negative a deal, because it affects their overall karma.
    i think it would ensure people who vote negative actually have some substantial things to say rather than things like "I hate dell because they suck" comments. Because if the general community doesn't agree, then their karma takes a hit.

    To add, I'm not sure if this is in force already, new signed up accounts should have a 1 month waiting period before being able to post -ve votes… this should address people jumping to other accounts when banned.

    To make things more interesting, deal posters can have the power to subtract 50% points on one individual user who posted a -ve on any one of their deals once every month - this action is not repeatable across multiple deals from the same deal poster.

    • Mikinoz on 27/03/2010 - 15:01

      I like the thinking but disagree with the idea, the main point being some are more negative than positive, sometimes with good reason.

      The people who tend to be more negative are those that are usually critical of the deal for one reason or another and usually deemed as a negative ie given your examples trolls, nothing else to do but complain etc.

      liked your trigger happy comment which probably applies to myself i can admit although do you agree some are postive trigger happy aswell and do we need to encourage votes for no reason ?

      Your example punishes the negative voter and i dont think thats the answer after all it should be a fair voting system if it indeed is a voting system

      I think a negative isnt complaining or trolling

      I have a strong opinion and some experience/knowledge of the deal and that is why i tend to negative vote, i cant speak for others. I also positive vote aswell although i may negative vote more.

      I think we need to encourage opinions of the cummunity as it can be very helpfull when buying a deal, especially location info availability etc as long as the neg vote carries a valid reason then seems okay by me.

      in summation i think ideas like this are good and should be the reasons for debate and change, i agree there is need for change and obviously there is some discussions quite regularily

      • slowmo on 27/03/2010 - 15:44

        I agree that the idea penalises -ve voters more… thats why in the idea i did put in some mechanisms/rules to avoid penalising the legit voter… though, I must say, even as strongly opinionated as i believe myself to be, I don't think I've neg'ed more than 10 posts in a month?

        I don't think it punishes legit -ve voters because the karma balance gets reset monthly, while legit 'bad fish deals' does not reduce your karma. :)

        The subtraction of points is like saying "I have strong opinions to say about this post and I don't mind putting my karma on the line to say it." what it does though, is prevents people just tagging "+1/agree" on every single other posts that surfaced.

        Afterall, anyone could say bad things in a comment w/o voting +ve or -ve in a deal anyway right? ;)

        OZbargains, imho, is a site that needs deals to be posted, thus there is a need for a system that encourage +ve votes so that deal posters keep posting, while penalising abusive -ve posters

        There is a need to strike a balance though, not to deter potential posters (by giving them too many hoops to jump) while maintaining a proper feedback quality.

        The sad thing about most feedback is that humans tend to make emotional decisions based on past history (which can be 3 years ago) which are quite irrelevant now. (eg. xyz bought a SomeBrand pentium pc 5 years ago, and now commenting SomeBrand makes bad computers.. and tell people he will not to touch it with a barge pole.) But there could be exceptions too… tough. :S

        Ultimately it's just an idea, and like all things in the world, it could be improved or there is a better alternative.

        I think like all posts and comments, ozbargains is missing a "flag post/comment to mods" button… too.. it really saves mods trawling all the posts… especially expired or duplicate ones :)

      • Mazley on 27/03/2010 - 16:42

        I don't know Mikinoz - I mean, I'm not a big neg voter myself, but I can't help but think that if you're neg voting more than you are pos voting, you're either looking for deals to vote down, or your not voting pos on the good deals.

        In my opinion, there's a heap more good deals than bad deals - and this is usually reflected in the massive amount of positive votes to the relatively small amount of negative votes.

        Like I've said in the past, I think neg votes are still needed, and just because I don't use them much, doesn't mean I don't appreciate them, and the people who give good reasons behind handing them out.

        I think just a pos/neg tally beside each users name would be a good way to understand the general tone of the users (pos/neg/indifferent) - and maybe you need to look for some good deals to give a pos to Mikinoz :D

    • SomeGuyOnOzB on 16/04/2010 - 16:19

      -> slowmo
      It's an idea but, I think it would create a different problem.

      It might encourage pointless +ve voting from people who like to vote negative or who are otherwise trying to work the system.

      At the moment, we find that high numbers of +ves tend to point out what might be worth looking at, or giving a second review.

      But if there are people running around voting +ves to work the system, we could find a lot of undesirable deals floating up through the system too.

      Mulling …

      Some people will take a negative vote more personally than others.
      Then there are the issues of how the system is automated etc, as discussed earlier. Especially the making a deal disappear so the only people you hear from are perhaps 2 haters.

  • [Deactivated] on 27/03/2010 - 19:18
    +1

    If we implemented the system above, again at the same time increasing the number of negative votes, before a deal disappear, then this would reduce the dramatic impact of the negative vote, while at the same time giving a voice to those, who are not happy about a deal.

    If we also gave users more ability to filter the deals that they see, then we take away the need to vote down deals that don't suit a particular person. eg Xbox, iphone.

    Linked to the need for a higher number of neg votes to kill the deal, then probably the emotion will go way from the neg voting, which is seen by many as a sort of personal censorship, hence the antagonism to this voting.

    Positive voting doesn't need to be explained, as it has less impact than negative voting. and here in I think lies the biggest difference. Neg voters say that they are "balancing" the positive voters who don't look at a deal properly. A valid point. But the way the site is setup due to the danger of spam and scams, the negative vote has more power than the positive, which is what I believe is creating the greatest angst. With many more users than when first implemented its now out of kilter even more.

    Given the higher number of users maybe also the positive vote threshold for a deal to be classified as popular should be increased as well. This being fairer for all.

    The karma idea has merit, just may take a longer time to sort out and implement, where as the category display and higher votes will be an interim solution until Karma can be implemented.

  • Wampus on 28/03/2010 - 18:33
    +1

    As a new member, I've noticed the only stuff that really appears on the front page is 'universal appeal' items such as fuel or ice creams, or I.T. products. There have been some incredible deals I've seen slip by, simply because they're more of a niche market, and I guess the problem is that less people are interested, and also that less people are knowledgeable enough to mark something as a bargain.

    I think the site is great, and I really enjoy it.

    • slowmo on 28/03/2010 - 19:19

      I think most ones like that are garment/apparel ?

      I would definitely recognise 'popular' brands like LV or mont blanc, but I'm pretty sure if someone posted a $300 pen which RRP is $500….I would think it's a bargain, then there is another side of the story where some relatively unknown (to me) brand that charges $700 for a pair of jeans… which my most expensive pair from marks and spenser is $150.

      Perhaps its got to do with the retail owner's perception of value and bargain versus the potential buyer's.

      • [Deactivated] on 29/03/2010 - 07:36

        AS well it may do with margin they receive and general demand for the item. Brand name food items have been going up in price due to concentration of suppliers, eg Nestle with Ice-cream, Soft drinks with Schweppes/Kraft. With generics now costing 50% less the brand name price gouge is more apparent.

        But this does give them the perceived large discount when a special comes on board, and as bargain hunters we are being conditioned to require bigger discounts. But huge discounts on items that are priced right in the beginning and on lower volume products are different. Sometimes its hard to change expectations, agian with limited experience, how often do we shop for fountain pens and know what is a good discount in that market, as Wampus points out.

        But that is what this site does, it helps as long as the right judgment criteria is made - that being advice from other pen buyers on the merit of a deal, rather than one who uses their softdrink expectations to make a call. Which then goes back to, less votes and less comments.

  • princess_nik_nak on 05/04/2010 - 13:29
    +1

    im only new to this site and didnt know how the neg/positive thing worked but since reading this i get the idea. i never press negative on a deal, only positive if im interested in it but if im not i dont put my vote in as something that might not benefit me most likely will benefit someone else and will be a great deal in their eyes as they are after something like it.i only put negatives on comments on the thread i dont agree with for instance, the other day someone had a spelling error in the title and then someone commented and was quite rude the way they pointed out there was a spelling error and it was actually a really good deal so i put positive on the deal but a negative on the comment as it was just rude and uncalled for.

  • dragonrabit on 15/04/2010 - 09:09

    and this is based on my experience too, i have put on the title very clear with capital letter said this is only for certain people only. then i got negative vote, some member said not bargain coz he/she can't get it.
    not sure how this person can finish his/her high school?
    i am sure he/she can read it, but it seems the common problem in here is he/she doesn't understand what he/she read it.
    another one, posted a bargain, then i got so many attacks, claiming i am the reps of my post. not sure if my words are too good, so makes a lot of people believe i am the reps of the company that i posted.
    next, when someone posted the deal about certain country then certain people does't like that country put travel warning. in fact the travel warning it self is bias, has political involvement. i was thinking again, are these people work for the government?
    post a new deal, then got negative vote, in fact this person never bought any item from this store. just doesn't like the seller from certain countries. in this case, i would rather said racist to this voter.

    i guess, mods need more follow the rule strictly, some repeat offender that bully other member, or make racist comment twice should be remove from this forum.

    • neil on 15/04/2010 - 10:32

      We've had to step in on a number of times with comments regarding race and personal attacks as you know but we can't be everywhere at once.

      Now you do bring up a good point though. The majority of the time when commenters think the OP is a rep in disguise, they are spot on. But then there are the other occasions where commenters throw around accusations. Either way, the mods have some great tools for tracking down reps and it should be left to us so we can actually investigate and act on the situation. We want discussion but we don't want accusations that discourage members from posting.

      • SomeGuyOnOzB on 16/04/2010 - 17:21

        -> Dragonrabit

        My response may be "coloured" by the amount of time I've spent dealing with your reports and the amount of inappropriate comments I've had to remove because of you.

        However, as you've decided to publicly judge that the mods aren't following the rules strictly enough, then I guess that you are asking for your own public response.

        1. Someone negatived you without reading the deal properly

        Yes. I don't like it when that happens to me either. Also when I see that someone has done it. But when I deal with a report, it is nice to see that people know about and use the reporting button.

        1. You were accused of being a rep

        I know 2 deals where that happened. I can see the original revisions.

        It is better when people raise reports with the mods, rather than posting publicly, so we can perform a discrete investigation, when we have time, rather than things becoming personal.

        I can also see that those posts did engender suspicion.
        One originally said, I found this site on the web last night, haven't tried it but thought I'd post it as a deal - which was before the report button was invented and, was treated with suspicion.

        The second one is for Fintel, which is a group that teaches trading strategies, I believe. It seems some members are suspicious of such groups.

        But yes, it is not a nice experience when people accuse you of being a rep in public. It is much better for people to ask the mods to do a check, via the Report button.

        You do understand, your thinking is not too far from the people you don't like?

        You write here that you found some people's posting looks suspicious, ie do they work for the government … but don't like it when others say your posting looks suspicious … ie do you work for the store?

        Just wondering if you can maybe see things from the other perspective now.

        Not sure which neg you are referring to, about someone neg'ing for the deal coming from one country. I don't have time now to research into that.

        I dealt with some cases involving you and another member, to do with bullying.

        It should be noted that you, dragonrabit are also guilty of racism and repeated bullying. It was decided, partly by the person you were bullying, that you might learn.

        You have stopped your bullying, but if you want us to enforce a rule against repeated offenses, then that includes you.

        Also, since it's been brought up, the person who was having a go at dragonrabit is the person that dragonrabit was bullying earlier.

        I write that not for people to ask dragonrabit about it, but because dragonrabit has brought up his/her side of an incident and people need some information to balance out what has been presented.

        Thank you

  • stralya on 15/04/2010 - 21:38

    To answer the original question of 'why I don't post any more?'. I posted my first deal earlier this week. Within hours, after it had received several positive votes, it seems to have mysteriously disappeared, apparently deleted by a moderator. No explanation at all. It couldn't have been the site, or the deal. And it wasn't a duplicate either and conformed to site rules. There have been further deals very similar to it posted after mine was posted that are still on the site and are active.

    The arbitrariness of the process irks me. So, I'm happy to go back to being a spectator and not want to be a contributor. Why go through the trouble if someone is going to unilaterally delete it without even a word of explanation.

    • neil on 15/04/2010 - 23:58

      99% of the time there is a solid reason and an explanation given. Your deal is the 1% and I can see the confusion.

      http://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/24259

      These groupon sites are a new concept here (deals popping up here in the past 2 weeks) in Australia. The mods have had discussions with ourselves as well as having a site discussion and have decided to keep in line with offerme's guidelines of only posting deals once the minimum has been reached. In the current form of the rules, you were well in your rights to post the deal. The minimum rule will be added to the list of rules. The issue being we have to set aside time from moderating the site to write the rule, agree in consensus with mods, and to let users know.

      So in this case, we take responsibility for the lack of communication. General mod etiquette is to post a comment in the thread re: the reason for removing, then unpublishing it with a short explanation in the title.

      We are volunteers and users just like you. Between the 5 of us we get slammed with SPAM, duplicate, people fighting with each other and other requests, so if you see something vague, it's not intentional.

      • stralya on 16/04/2010 - 09:44

        Neil - Appreciate the feedback and the good work you are all putting in.

    • scotty on 16/04/2010 - 00:00

      If you actually check your post history, you'll see it is still there and you can still click through to see the discussions and the reason why it was removed.

      But neil was right as he pointed out the discussion thread on Scoopon-like sites and the general rules on them.

  • Crownie on 16/04/2010 - 01:14
    +1

    I don't post deals as I'm too busy buying all the bargains that Ozbargainers post :P

    • [Deactivated] on 16/04/2010 - 20:00
      +1

      then stop it- have some self control - LOL. Or maybe a mod may need to cancel your credit card!!!

      • Mikinoz on 16/04/2010 - 20:02
        +1

        trust me they have to do worse than that to stop me lol seriously thinking of barring myself :)

  • Jaxx on 26/04/2010 - 10:24

    Time is basically why I have not posted many bargains over the last 4 years! (My children are 4 years old). I wish I had the time to actively hunt for bargains and post them here like I used to.

    I still browse this site often though and I am really glad that Scotty has kept it going for so long, one of my favourite sites on the internet ^_^

  • patientvalue on 27/04/2010 - 12:52

    I also find deals i spot are posted quickly. Which is a good problem. Not too worried by neg posting but then it has happened yet (one 1 post). But i struggle with my own patience (see comment below) with stupid comments.

    -

    Perhaps this is not the correct forum (apologies).

    A suggestion re negative voting. Change the symbol from a '-' to a '?". It would blunt the intensity felt by OP but wouldnt overcome other issues eg rules from removing from homepage as well as nasty/irrevelant comments. It would also encourage the idea of questioning rather than challenging. That may seem too passive but then politeness is by its nature reserved. The anonymity of the internet seems to condone directness and rudeness or at least a willingness to not reflect before hitting the send button.

    This would require changing unknown avatars to something else, perhaps a portrait outline…

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join