The community needs to take an interest in policing itself to be sure but counting on that kind of policing is not practical or appropriate. I remember the audio scamming on eBay being so extraordinary once that dozens of ads for high-end gear (often with authentic serial numbers) going for unrealistically bargain prices would be displayed. These sellers would always steal 100% of the money sent. They did something eBay calls "takeovers" (when scammers would appropriate the feedback from highly rated sellers as theirs). When reported they were kicked off & back up within days. When I complained the audio section needed to be actively policed by eBay they replied they only appreciated my telling them & they only responded to customer complaints. They were never proactive. I responded that naturally, they were thankful to me, given it was free labour. I asked how happy they would be to work 1 day a week for free in return for such non-compensated thanks. No immediate response but within a few months, I received a hand-signed letter from an eBay VP that informed me that new security procedures were being put in place in certain sections. I'm sure it was sent out to some others as well. The massive scamming was then absent & only individual items were potentially suspect from then on.
The question then becomes to what extent is eBay responsible for being proactive? Did they have the problems complained about in this thread, to nearly the same extent before they charged more than commercial users? Also to what degree are there similar issues on US Audiomart?
I'd like to hear from other AGers on this.
I remember when AG proudly had a manifesto on the site (Directly analogous to the Constitution with the engraved in stone rules & principles of AG). When they started charging regular audiophiles (& perhaps other infringements) in direct contravention of these published rights, I asked why they were violating their charter which was not changed as they did so? I received a phone call from the owner of AG who couldn't be bothered either to read or change it - to ask where it was in the manifesto/constitution. I showed him and he then said, "We cannot be expected to know every detail of what's in there ! " I was so flabbergasted that I was too taken back to reply/ask, "How well would that argument go over in a court of law regarding the actual constitution & metaphorically is there any kind of difference here? I was then told, "AG was never meant to be free !" (presumably for non-commercial audiophiles) - as if that was somehow self-evident. There was as far as I know no evidence at all for this conveyed. Perhaps other AGers can more knowledgeably comment.
Does AG's attitude in any way. shape or form encourage issues to arise? I know that clicking on what appears to be ads from regular folks selling used gear too often takes one to new that is advertised at retail. Is this right & proper & create the feeling of integrity many/most (one hopes) aspires to? Does it affect the issues complained about here? I'm sure others have valuable experiences & opinions on all of the above.
The question then becomes to what extent is eBay responsible for being proactive? Did they have the problems complained about in this thread, to nearly the same extent before they charged more than commercial users? Also to what degree are there similar issues on US Audiomart?
I'd like to hear from other AGers on this.
I remember when AG proudly had a manifesto on the site (Directly analogous to the Constitution with the engraved in stone rules & principles of AG). When they started charging regular audiophiles (& perhaps other infringements) in direct contravention of these published rights, I asked why they were violating their charter which was not changed as they did so? I received a phone call from the owner of AG who couldn't be bothered either to read or change it - to ask where it was in the manifesto/constitution. I showed him and he then said, "We cannot be expected to know every detail of what's in there ! " I was so flabbergasted that I was too taken back to reply/ask, "How well would that argument go over in a court of law regarding the actual constitution & metaphorically is there any kind of difference here? I was then told, "AG was never meant to be free !" (presumably for non-commercial audiophiles) - as if that was somehow self-evident. There was as far as I know no evidence at all for this conveyed. Perhaps other AGers can more knowledgeably comment.
Does AG's attitude in any way. shape or form encourage issues to arise? I know that clicking on what appears to be ads from regular folks selling used gear too often takes one to new that is advertised at retail. Is this right & proper & create the feeling of integrity many/most (one hopes) aspires to? Does it affect the issues complained about here? I'm sure others have valuable experiences & opinions on all of the above.