Modern Vespa

I'd be all for some threshold to be met to respond to a listing, e.g. no PMs until x posts or karma, but if the argument is give total access to buyers, can't see how we can have it both ways....

It's a slippery slope anytime you define criteria for approve/decline; you will always have false positive and false negative impacts - just need to find a balance that's acceptable.
I've built numerous credit scoring models and countless approve/decline rules with multitudes of criteria, so hopefully my suggestion won't complicate matters.

Proposed rule to allow For Sale posts and PMs...

# of days since account generated > 10 AND
Good karma feedback (# of thumbs up responses, not roundels) >3 AND
# of total posts > 5

This would allow users to build up an "MV Credit Score" by being an active and positively contributing member. It would also allow moderators time to identify the unwanted and nefarious actors coming to this site.

part of the problem is that this new "style" of scam isn't carried out by listing an item. the mode of operation is to contact people who post wanted ads claiming to have what they are looking for.

so, while we would like to be welcoming and allow people who maybe their only interaction with this forum is buying and selling-- possibly only buying or selling one time-- this makes the post count a bit of a hurdle.

I'm okay with there being a threshold for posting an ad but I could see somebody getting turned off, not wanting to participate and just wandering off.

the same for using the PM function. if there is a threshold and a new user needs needs assistance they can't get it or if they have posted an ad they can't respond.

it's a fine line, to be honest.

Agreed. And this is exactly why I am proceeding cautiously and with feedback from the community.

"the best D-fence is a good O-fence" -the cook on Alice

we coming for you shitbird scammers!

(I'm only sort of kidding)

jokes aside, this new tactic of contacting people and offering up what they're looking for puts a real wrinkle in the ability to curtail the bad behavior because in essence it boils down to limiting communication between people.

it now becomes how do we identify the bad actors and take away the tools that they use to do their dirty work while allowing for communication freely between people that are not doing the bad things. oh, and not make it difficult to implement, explain or monitor. while being seamlessly integrated into the current structure with as little to no work as possible.

all while not breaking anything and not evoking the rage of the great unwashed masses outstanding membership.

easy peasy.

Yep. That actually is a very accurate summation of the problem.

Anytime you try to apply criteria to ID these bad actors, you will invariably catch "good" ones as well.

It seems the primary tool being used is the PM functionality, so that's the activity that should be restricted.

Aside from post count, age of the account, and positive responses...what other data points can be used to further define these bad actors? What are the common attributes and values that can be seen and are actionable?

There is a fine line to draw to make the forum useable and welcoming to new members.

Agreed that private messages are the primary vector. That said, if anyone is aware of scammers systematically listing bogus items directly in the FS section, I would like to hear about it.

One potential (but fairly unpleasant) option would be to moderate private messages coming from zero- or low-post-count accounts — possibly even requiring a moderator to approve it before it reaches the recipient. I am genuinely NOT excited by this option, though. It's more work for the moderators, and I really don't want to read anyone else's PMs.

An alternative to that would be to moderate the PMs from low-post-count accounts, but only have the mods approve the outside of the envelope — in other words, who it was from and who it was addressed to, without actually seeing the contents inside. This would at least give us a clue that someone was working a scam.

Here's another option: below some arbitrary post count, require one public post for each PM. In other words, if you've only posted once, you only get to send one PM. Want to send another? You've got to keep posting publicly.

Once they get past a certain threshold, then maybe PMs are unrestricted. And receiving of PMs wouldn't be counted against the total.

On another forum there's a post number restriction for messages and links and images (10 I think).

There's often a flurry of shit posting from legitimate new users to get to the limit.

Yeah, that's what I am specifically trying to avoid. When we had a post count limit for PM usage, we saw the same behavior. There must be a better way.

Have you seen the movie? Not the one about fake beards... however creepy they are. Bowie nails the title track and it does involve gasoline so not totally OT. Not so sure about trusting the cat people though.

Some interesting suggestions here so I can't really add anything. Honestly, in today's world you have to be aware of online scams and phishing etc or you really put yourself at risk. It's like the door-to-door vacuum sales guy is visiting you every day and boy does he have a deal for you.

See? You do love me!

It's weird because I would have thought member reputation would go a long way towards countering that problem, but in my experience it didn't.

Years ago I got a quote on the Malossi big bore kit for the LX from a local motorcycle shop and the price they offered me was WAYYYYYYY less than Scooter West.

Sooo much less that I knew I could undercut Scooter West AND offer a substantial savings to MV'ers AND still pocket a few bucks for my time going to the dealership and then heading off to the post office.

No one took up the offer. Instead I got messages from skeptical people questioning how I was getting the kits for so cheap.

Fair question, but at this point I'd been working in the industry over a decade, known by all of the shops in my city, built a little (growing) motorcycle community, put my face on video every single week... I'm really not hard to reach... But people still were worried I'd throw all that away just to screw them out of a couple hundred bucks for a Malossi kit. They just didn't have that trust.

I get that you shouldn't trust anyone on the internet, but, if you can't trust the people on the forum who have been here for years and never had a bad thing said about dealing with them... who can you trust?

lol, the fake beard pic is to remind people to lighten up and not take things too seriously. I feel like we all need more of that energy sometimes.

If you'd like to keep the positive vibes going, here's one for you:

"Boot to the head! (Na, na!)"

I barely ever use PMs. A few times, they've been glitchy for me...as in messages disappear into the aether.

I kinda wish we could publicly post to show interest in the sales section, but I understand the reasons why it's turned off. I hate haggling, especially unsolicited crap from people who aren't interested or involved in the transaction.

Pretty much everything I can think of that's direct action has been mentioned. The only thing I might add: would another sticky in the For Sale section with some tips on avoiding scams do any good? Things like, "be wary of requests to immediately move from PMs to emails," "be wary of requests for money orders," etc.
(It's been a while since I did anything that didn't get delivered in person, so I'm rusty on the habits.)

Given how many people ignore these two stickies that are already in the For Sale section:

The Rules - MUST READ FIRST
Topics Without [LOCATION] First WILL BE DELETED ON SIGHT!

I think we can safely say that if we want to hide some crucial information, the best place to put it where it will never be seen would be a sticky at the top of the For Sale forum.

This is something that nobody seems to believe about stickies, but I've been doing this for a very, very long time, and I am 100% certain that stickies are one of the worst inventions of the forum era. In our quest for fresh content, we skip over anything that isn't obviously blinking NEW NEW NEW and head straight for the shiny object.

In fact, I'm going to give this phenomenon a name: I shall hereby call it Forum Target Fixation.

The chaos dev in me would build a script out to automatically replace the rules thread at somewhat random intervals with a randomly generated but plausible title to keep tricking people into accidentally reading it.

For sale: Wooden scooter.

There is also an interim dialog that shows up when you post in For Sale that spells out the [Location] rule again. You have to actually dismiss the dialog to get to the part where you can post. And somehow, people still manage to not add a [Location].

It's maddening.

Hear you go.

And the government sells them a drivers license.

I work in e-commerce. Our site sells a product that doesn't "count" for free shipping minimums (but also ships free). We have it listed in the product description, have a popup when they're on either the category or product pages, one that pops up when they add to cart, and one that pops up in the cart itself.

We still get confused complaints about it.

Yeah... I've learned a lot of people simply don't read at all.

Last year, I was trying to confirm an appointment, and make sure the people on the other end had my correct address (it was a service appointment). They didn't, so when I replied to correct them, I enlarged the text as much as Gmail would allow, put it in bold, and typed my address. Back to normal text, I asked them to please update their records. Because I've had the misfortune to deal with this company for years, I copy-pasted my address again, large and bold. My correct address was over 50% of the email, visually.

Five minutes later, I got a reply saying, "Sure, so you're at [incorrect address again]."

I immediately called them, asked them why they couldn't get my address correct from the email they had just replied to, and was told, "Oh, I didn't read that part." I cannot understand how they were able to open it and reply to it WITHOUT READING THAT PART.

Yeah, people just flat out don't read shit. I don't know how, but I've just accepted it at this point.

^^^^

Yep, for some people the interwebs are just a write-only medium.

I like this line of thinking. For online sales it's all about credibility.

Here are some suggestions. My assumption is that users need an account and they also be signed in to post or send PM's on ModernVespa.com (MV).

Any buyer (user) has to be signed into their account on MV in order to make an offer. When the buyer sends a PM to the seller, part of that process could include MV automatically providing data on the buyer, such as their account status (# of posts, # days active, negative feedback, aka their MV Credibility rating), and maybe a high level "location" based on IP address, etc.). This information could be included in the header / footer of the buyer's PM messages.

This wouldn't stop scammers with a firewall, however it would give the seller more data regarding the credibility of the potential buyer. It's still less data than the seller gets on ebay, but it is relevant data in order for the seller to gauge the trustworthiness of the potential buyer.

(Note: there are likely privacy and related issues that need to be assessed here. The IP address could be anonymized but still usable to identify general location on a de-personalized basis, i.e. city or region not street address. Unless the buyer is using a VPN or proxy server and then it is moot. Also, I don't think it would pass under GDPR).

Suggestions in the For Sale / Wanted section:
For users now would-be sellers, use the MV Credibility rating to assess submitted ads.

Add a mandatory Location field to the submission form then include that info in the posting. City, State or Zip. Cross check that with their IP?

Add a seller modifiable flag to indicate "Sold".

On the For Sale / Wanted main view, maybe change the columns. Headers could be, from left to right, Topics, Location, Author, Views, Sold Y/N). Could drop the Last Post and Replies columns since those aren't relevant in the For Sale section.

It's a never ending battle and kudos to the moderators for being on the front lines.

Consider adding a forum section to "out" scammers. Sellers could forward PM's from scammers so other users can steer clear...even though these are burner accounts. Kind of like the bodge id thread in NSM.

Okay, going for more scotch now. Cheers.
Dave

Imagining which of you are in the cranky caucus makes me giggle.

Now back to telling long tales at the kids' table.

what about a 30 day hold on posting to the FS section after an account has been established

That would preclude the people who first come to MV to buy or (more likely) sell a bike, who were never members prior. I'd like to accommodate those people, even if they weren't a part of the community prior.

Additionally, this wouldn't prevent the current PM-based scammers.

Agreed. But I thought there was a five post minimum to use the for sale session. Or is that a minimum for PMs? I'm a little confused.

Would making private messages reportable be an option?

(Disclaimer: I haven't coded so much as a webpage in html since java and flash became a thing.)

You can report private messages. Just hold your thumb over the title and send the link to one of the moderators.

That's a reasonable suggestion. Thanks.