Name and shame?

[soj]

I'd like to ask members opinions please on a "name and shame" policy for DN Trade.

Generally speaking, I like to emphasise the positive on DNT.

However, in recent times, someone did not complete a purchase on a domain. Basically they were given lots of opportunities to settle; and made written promises to do so.

Then followed a variety of excuses - "they used the wrong account number"; "urgent personal business had cropped up" etc. They then said that they were going to deposit
the money in cash into the account. Never happened - then more excuses.

Other forums operate "name and shame" policies. They do this to protect fellow members. I don't want DNT to be filled with this sort of stuff, but I think in certain circumstances it is warranted.

Obviously there should be some safeguards to prevent malicious posts.

What do you think? I'd appreciate your thoughts please.
.

 

[snoopy]

YES, bring it in.

 

[ScottNugent]

Sounds fair enough, perhaps based on a warning system. I do think thought that smart members should be able to gauge a worrying buyer from simply saying "Sale fell through, up for grabs again".

 

[zhenjie]

 

[fcdoms]

Disputes and forum gripe threads can be popular, however negative.

I admire Ned's ambition to keep the forum a positive experience however, as I think that will pay dividends far greater in the longer term - just my opinion.

The current rule, Rule 13:

DNT does not get involved in 3rd party disputes. This includes other members or sponsors. All opinions and posts made by members do not necessarily reflect those of DNT. We are a discussion forum where members have the right to free speech. Please resolve domain sales disputes off the board. If you have an issue with someone on the forum, take it up with them. Please do not attempt to involve DNT into your discussions.

As long as DNT remains uninvolved, then perhaps there's a place for a sub section on the forum for disputes which members can use to take issue with each other.

It may be necessary to change the rule to announce that sometimes DNT will take a stance - any legal advice?

If this issue relates to Ned or any other admins or mods experiencing a deal falling over, then maybe they should have the right to also post there as a member (not as a representative of DNT).

I've read enough dispute threads on other forums to know that it's something that can be there for all to see, as ScottNugent says - but maybe a system of "Infractions" could be introduced? Maybe on the profile, and even on each post, coloured text next to a member's name or replace the member tagline, such as "juior/senior member" with "Infraction" and link to the reason for it.

I don't like much of the gamification on forums personally, all the little icons and ribbons are fun to a lot of people but I am certain I won't have the time or inclination (at least willingly) to attempt to earn these. But I would be much more certain to avoid getting an infraction label.

Hope these ideas help in a decision.

 

[Snooks]

Unfortunately some deals go bad. I think as long as the Complainant makes a factual report and the other party is provided the right of reply, then it is a good thing.

I have twice outlined issues on this board:

1. Non-finishing of a $5000 site by Spin Your Web (unresolved)

2. Non provision of a site and goods purchased from Kirk Robinson (Designer) (money recouped)

On both occasions i feel that being able to post in the forum assisted me in getting input from the members. It also allowed members to be informed that should they be dealing with these people, caution should be used.

It may also work in the reverse......lets say i lodge 2-3 more reports over the next month, then perhaps next time i am requesting a quote the Designers would remember ive lodged 4-5 companints in 4 month and perhaps it should be considered that im a "Challenging Customer"?

I guess im saying a Complaints Dept is great but with strict enforcement of etiquitte so its not one big ugly fight.

 

[acheeva]

Judge, jury & executioner - no thanks

We are have gripes regarding performance standards, poor business practices and more often than not they are judgements with bias

Public forums are not the place to vent these gripes

The court or mediation are the answer if someone is seeking restitution and I have no problem with those actions being reported factually (as well as the decision)

The web development business is riddled with dissatisfied customers; some the result of slick marketers with no substance but many are the result of gross expectation gaps

 

[snoopy]

The court or mediation are the answer if someone is seeking restitution and I have no problem with those actions being reported factually (as well as the decision)

Rarely is it worth taking that step. How many domainers have had deals go bad? (I'd say most). How many have considered it worthwhile to go to court? (very few).

 

[Snooks]

Public forums are not the place to vent these gripes

I appreciate your opinion but im tending to think you are wrong. The public forum is the perfect place, given that using my example, i engaged the Developer due to him being in this forum.

Now im not dumb enough to believe that everyone in here is great and honest, but if all things were the same, i would choose a member from here over a person that is not a member, purely on the basis that hes circulating with people that i have come to respect.

So i feel that if things go horribly wrong, which they did, i have not only the right but in some ways an obligation to let my friends and fellow members know that we have a really bad apple.

Just my thoughts

 

[FirstPageResults]

I think keep it as is for now and review posts on a case by case basis.

In general Domainers are tight bunch... word gets around quickly...

Send me the name

 

[cherrytron]

I'd be happy to be part of an additional private topic/subforum within this forum with that content. I would consider myself talking amongst my friends whom I would like them to tell me behind closed doors who/what/where I could potentially lose thousands of $$$.

Maybe it can be locked down to auda members ($22 per annum?) or I would pay $25 to be a "member" of said forum (just a nominal amount to keep gen pop out and the srs punters in) oh and it should also be a closed / non-crawlable by SE topic.

 

[findtim]

I think keep it as is for now and review posts on a case by case basis.

In general Domainers are tight bunch... word gets around quickly...

Send me the name

I read all posts so far and EVERYONE has valid comments, i think that "word gets around quickly" should be where DNT sits, you are just creating a minefield that doesn't need to be created.

Why not FLIP IT , you have already "domain services" so expand that to a referals process...... "i'm looking for a webdesigner... can you PM me some recommendations" , state the rule is nobody can PITCH they have to be recommended.

Go the positive not the negative.

tim

 

[soj]

I'd be happy to be part of an additional private topic/subforum within this forum with that content. I would consider myself talking amongst my friends whom I would like them to tell me behind closed doors who/what/where I could potentially lose thousands of $$$.

Maybe it can be locked down to auda members ($22 per annum?) or I would pay $25 to be a "member" of said forum (just a nominal amount to keep gen pop out and the srs punters in) oh and it should also be a closed / non-crawlable by SE topic.

Thanks Paul - good points you raise.

We have been experimenting with this already, so I will be in touch shortly.
.

 

[soj]

And just as a footnote to the original post, the person ended up paying for the domain.