Time for reform and updates?

[+Jackalgirl]

NeverSummer and tsun --

 

You've both expressed what I meant by a partnership, although I realize now that I wasn't using the word correctly. I didn't mean to imply that Groundspeak has, or should have, input or control over the process of coin production or sales beyond selling the codes and approving the design.

 

However, because they control the codes and approve the designs, there is a link in most customers' minds between the vendor and Groundspeak. For example, when a vendor screws up, there are always -- always -- calls for Groundspeak to step in and do something, whether it be denying the company codes in the future or even demanding (Groundspeak-to-Vendor) to give Cacher Joe his money back.

 

That's what I meant by partnership, and I'm sorry for the confusion brought about by my using the word in a way that's not entirely the same as its general meaning.

 

If Groundspeak were to come up with a set of guidelines and say, "if you want to obtain codes from us and continue to obtain codes from us, and if you want the right to advertise your products on our site (including in the forum), then you must adhere to these basic guidelines". Then, Groundspeak can follow through and strike a bad vendor off their approved vendors list and refuse to provide codes to the people involved.

 

The guidelines do not need to be draconian. A "best practices" outline would do, I imagine. In fact, the guidelines could (and should) be modelled on what those companies who are doing well are already doing. Those of you who do this already would not be impacted at all. Those who either don't do it, or don't know to do it, would need to take heed.

 

Groundspeak would need to come up with a fairly detailed understanding of how it will determine that those guidelines are being violated, how bad the violation is, whether they will offer the vendor some form of probation or not, how they will determine if the vendor has straightned up his/her act, etc -- in other words, it's easy to have guidelines. It's the follow-up that's hard.

[+Jackalgirl]

An add-on: I don't think that companies should be required to participate in the Forums. They should be made aware of it (and its excellent potential as a sales-and-communiation tool), but a company's primary means of notifying its customers should be via its website and through direct communication with its customers.

 

(I am thinking of Coins and Pins, not to toot their horn over everyone else's. They have a chart on their pre-sales page that gives estimated dates for everything. And although they don't give me blow-by-blow updates on changes, they at least do let me know when my order has shipped.)

[+NeverSummer]

.

I understand what you're saying.

 

...feels like we're getting somewhere...and I hope that more folks do chime in. ...And I hope that at some point TPTB might stop in and say hello (I know you're watching!)

[+Jackalgirl]

I understand what you're saying.

 

...feels like we're getting somewhere...and I hope that more folks do chime in. ...And I hope that at some point TPTB might stop in and say hello (I know you're watching!)

 

Well, I'm thinking that as a community of both vendors and customers, we should establish what we think are the most basic "good business" practices that should be required of a business in order to maintain a good relationship with Groundspeak.

 

This list of practices should not be numerous or place too much of a burden on the business (or Groundspeak) -- I'm talking about the bare bones, has-to-do (as opposed to nice-to-do). Once we've established those bare bones, we should then brainstorm as to the most efficient way for those issues to be reported and resolved (and, failing that, for Groundspeak to withdraw its patronage of those businesses in terms of code provision).

 

Then, when we're done, we can present the whole thing to Groundspeak as a complete package (for them to accept or reject or modify as they need, but at least we made the effort, right?).

 

I personally think that a business must, at a minimum:

- represent all coins offered for sale in as accurate a form as possible (e.g., don't advertise that a coin will have a custom icon when you're only making 100 of them, don't say you're making 50 when you're making 150, etc)

- post and maintain expected shipping dates for all pre-sale coins or coins that are not shipped at the same time payment is made, then post the fact that the coins have shipped when they have shipped.

- provide refunds to any customer, for any (or no) reason, within 3 days of the request made.

- make a reasonable effort to respond to customer inquiries.

- post a notification in a promiment spot on their website if a situation has occured that will prevent them from making timely responses to customers.

- be guaranteed its right to refuse service to customers for any reason.

 

I think that it's nice when a business:

- posts in the Geocoin Forum

- provides regular email newsletter updates

- only runs pre-sales when sample coins are in hand

- provides a complete timetable for pre-sale / reservation coins

- notifies customers personally when their orders have shipped

 

What do you think?

 

Also: do you think that specific numbers should be tied to titles like "LE" or "XLE", etc, or would it suffice if a store simply said "XLE, only 30 out of 500 made" or something like that? Or is being specific about how a vendor defines their coin's availability not necessary?

[+Jackalgirl]

Further thoughts: it's hard to objectively define what "reasonable effort" is in regard to email communication, so I'm not sure how (or if) that should actually be included in the "must do" list. But I just keep seeing, over and over, people stating "no response to my inquiries".

 

On second thought, maybe that should be on the "nice-to-do" list. It's nice when the vendor responds to you. But what's necessary is that the vendor promptly provides you a refund when you ask for one.

[ATMouse]

I just don't see GC paying one of their folks to monitor coin sales and delivery, or to even run down complaints of delivery.

 

They sell the tracking numbers and put the money in the bin.

 

It costs to either add to staffperson's job duties (don't they already have a full-time job?) OR to hire someone. GC isn't actually a big operation; go to HQ and you will see that.

[+Jackalgirl]

I just don't see GC paying one of their folks to monitor coin sales and delivery, or to even run down complaints of delivery.

 

They sell the tracking numbers and put the money in the bin.

 

It costs to either add to staffperson's job duties (don't they already have a full-time job?) OR to hire someone. GC isn't actually a big operation; go to HQ and you will see that.

 

And yet, they are doing this now, yes? I mean, that's the point of the Vendor Delays thread. It's to allow Groundspeak (Eartha, specifically) a means of tracking when vendors don't deliver. So there does seem to be interest on Groundspeak's part.

 

But you're right in that we can't add too much to the workload already (without providing trusted volunteers). So whatever solutions we come up with (after identifying our minimum requirements) -- those suggested solutions are going to have to build in the need for minimal extra work and/or staffing.

[+Rockin Roddy]

I won't say much here because I don't think I understand....but...I am against the idea of more regulations. If this idea is nothing more than inviting TPTB to make enough rules to make the fun turn into a hassle, we're all losers. I agree there's a problem, but I don't think making things complicated will help at all!!

 

Maybe a set of guidelines for vendors would be helpful, but the vendors are also having problems. What then? A set of guidelines for the buyers to follow too?? And a committee?? I don't even like the sounds of that, sounds big brotherly to me! Are we then going to vote people in? Will we make the commitee up as a term-limit type thing (say, let them sit on the committee for 2 years...4??). And just what would this committee do? What authority would they hold?

 

Seems like a HUGE hassle and not much help, but just MHO. Maybe I'm missing something and someone can set me straight, but....

[+Eartha]

Groundspeak's policy:

Those choosing to participate in an exchange on this board take full responsibility for any consequences of that exchange. Groundspeak is in no way involved in the sale or trading of items on this board and will not be held responsible or liable in any way for quality issues, fraud or any default of transfer on the part of the buyer or seller.

[+AtlantaGal]

I just don't see GC paying one of their folks to monitor coin sales and delivery, or to even run down complaints of delivery.

 

True, but I do think they need to get involved when issues with certain vendors spiral out of control and end up costing individuals in this forum thousands of dollars.

[+Jackalgirl]

I won't say much here because I don't think I understand....but...I am against the idea of more regulations. If this idea is nothing more than inviting TPTB to make enough rules to make the fun turn into a hassle, we're all losers. I agree there's a problem, but I don't think making things complicated will help at all!!

 

What I am suggesting is that we come up with a description of what we think would be the minimum expected behavior of vendors, rather than a set of regulations. If these are basic, common-sense, "best practices" type of behaviors, then it adds no burden to good vendors -- because they already do all those things, and more besides. For most vendors, it adds absolutely no extra burden to them -- or to Groundspeak.

 

As Atlanta Gal points out, however, sometimes we run into problems where there is really egregious behavior on the part of a vendor. The question is: how egregious is egregious? At what point would we recommend that Groundspeak take action, and what action would that be? Would we ever want Groundspeak to do something, even if all that is is to refuse the vendor's requests for more codes?

 

At what point does Groundspeak's reputation begin to take a hit, because they have that vendor listed on their "approved vendors" list? At what point would we, as a community, prefer that they take the vendor off of the approved vendors list?

 

Maybe a set of guidelines for vendors would be helpful, but the vendors are also having problems. What then? A set of guidelines for the buyers to follow too??

 

I'm not sure, but I don't think that would be possible. Rather than trying to control the behavior of buyers, I simply recommend that it be recognized that vendors have the right to refuse to do business with people (and they do).

 

And a committee?? I don't even like the sounds of that, sounds big brotherly to me! Are we then going to vote people in? Will we make the commitee up as a term-limit type thing (say, let them sit on the committee for 2 years...4??). And just what would this committee do? What authority would they hold?

 

I'm not really up for the idea of a committee, per se, either. I've served on committees and...well...I just don't like 'em. Usually, two people end up doing all the work and the rest of the people claim credit (yes, I'm a bit bitter). I don't recommend a committee either.

 

However, I do think it's possible for us, the community, to have a constructive discussion about it, even if the ultimate decision is that the system isn't broken as it is -- or that the problems don't occur with sufficient frequency or severity to demand a change to the current system.

 

Edited: I'd moved stuff around and it didn't make sense the way it was. Sorry!

Edited January 22, 2009 by Jackalgirl

[+Jackalgirl]

Groundspeak's policy:

Those choosing to participate in an exchange on this board take full responsibility for any consequences of that exchange. Groundspeak is in no way involved in the sale or trading of items on this board and will not be held responsible or liable in any way for quality issues, fraud or any default of transfer on the part of the buyer or seller.

 

Eartha, is it true that Groundspeak has suspended the sale of codes to vendors? If so -- and without naming names -- could you provide any insight as to why Groundspeak made the decision to do so?

 

Also, if Groundspeak is not interested in delinquent vendors, why is there a pinned feedback thread? Were you trying to get a sense of how widespread the problem was?

 

I do realize that the thread's complains are primarily about two companies, one of whom appears to be making good with the extremely delayed shipment of coins, so it is quite possible that the problem might be pretty limited. Do you, with all of your experience in the Forums, think that it's worth the trouble to discuss ways to try to avoid this sort of thing in the future?

[ELTADA]

I have been reading through this thread taking some time to digest before adding my two cents. I think I can speak from a buyer's perspective and recent newbie (I promoted myself to novice a short time ago! ).

 

I wonder if there would be more success in creating an informational "buyer's guide" that could be pinned. This could be created by interested forum participants (traders, buyers, vendors, lurkers, etc.) to include concepts that have already been raised in this thread...ie: MJ had some good ones like insisting on seeing mint samples prior to purchase, and Jackalgirl mentioned things like seeing delivery dates, minting numbers, etc.

 

Then new collectors could be referred to this document when they begin buying to see what they should be looking for. Not all vendors will do business this way (nor should they have to, that's their decision on how they want to do things) but it would give buyers an idea of how to reduce their risk (if they want to, that is!).

 

The problem I see with coming up with a set of vendor guidelines is that not all coin sales will fit neatly into this formula. There are individual personal coins going up for sale that won't have websites, group coins that you can't receive refunds on, etc. And keeping track of this, I think it's complicated.

 

I do think that we have to encourage buyers to step forward and insist that vendors be accountable. I have been lucky to have great dealings for all my coin purchases...but I have to stress that I have been lucky. I could have just as easily purchased something from one of the problem vendors that have been at the core of some recent discussion. My outlook is that for every person who defends a vendor who does not deliver paid product and refuses to communicate with buyers is adding to the problem. This might sound harsh but personal problems are not an excuse for stealing from your customers, IMO. Those that condone it are doing a disservice to their fellow coiners.

 

~edited to clarify a few things and fix grammar~

Edited January 22, 2009 by ELTADA

[+Rockin Roddy]

I have been reading through this thread taking some time to digest before adding my two cents. I think I can speak from a buyer's perspective and recent newbie (I promoted myself to novice a short time ago! ).

 

I wonder if there would be more success in creating an informational "buyer's guide" that could be pinned. This could be created by interested forum participants (traders, buyers, vendors, lurkers, etc.) to include concepts that have already been raised in this thread...ie: MJ had some good ones like insisting on seeing mint samples prior to purchase, and Jackalgirl mentioned things like seeing delivery dates, minting numbers, etc.

 

Then new collectors could be referred to this document when they begin buying to see what they should be looking for. Not all vendors will do business this way (nor should they have to, that's their decision on how they want to do things) but it would give buyers an idea of how to reduce their risk (if they want to, that is!).

 

The problem I see with coming up with a set of vendor guidelines is that not all coin sales will fit neatly into this formula. There are individual personal coins going up for sale that won't have websites, group coins that you can't receive refunds on, etc. And keeping track of this, I think it's complicated.

 

I do think that we have to encourage buyers to step forward and insist that vendors be accountable. I have been lucky to have great dealings for all my coin purchases...but I have to stress that I have been lucky. I could have just as easily purchased something from one of the problem vendors that have been at the core of some recent discussion. My outlook is that for every person who defends a vendor who does not deliver paid product and refuses to communicate with buyers is adding to the problem. This might sound harsh but personal problems are not an excuse for stealing from your customers, IMO. Those that condone it are doing a disservice to their fellow coiners.

 

~edited to clarify a few things and fix grammar~

 

I could probably get behind the informed buyer's guide idea!

 

With GS having their list of vendors, it does make problems especially if the vendor listed turns out to have problems. I think it would be in GS's best interest to drop the list altogether...but then something would be needed for newb buyers to get help from! As it is, more people ask who is good to work with than reads the list anyways...the Canadian vendor thread is proof of this.

 

The problem with the buyer's guide, who writes it, who approves it and can this be done without people having problems and feelings being hurt? That was my main concern about the committee, feelings being hurt and friendships being ruined!

[+fox-and-the-hound]

Just a thought, but why not build in a public trade-center? A simple trade-wizard type format. You can initialize a trade, both parties have a chance to sign in and enter there items of trade, both parties sign out with a review upon receiving their items. A review could a be a simple 1-5 scale rating for timeliness/item condition/communication, etc. It wouldn't be a mandatory system, but it would be a way to build a rating as a coin trader/vendor in good standing. You could build a reputation similar to ebay and if you had a growing number of issues, others would see it reflected here. I think only your trade standing reputation should show publicly though so that you could make trades without revealing the items involved. This would help when trying to make trades for gift coins, etc. If something like this were built would you be willing to use it? If not, why not?

Edited January 22, 2009 by fox-and-the-hound

[+Jedi_Mayq]

Just a thought, but why not build in a public trade-center? A simple trade-wizard type format. You can initialize a trade, both parties have a chance to sign in and enter there items of trade, both parties sign out with a review upon receiving their items. A review could a be a simple 1-5 scale rating for timeliness/item condition/communication, etc. It wouldn't be a mandatory system, but it would be a way to build a rating as a coin trader/vendor in good standing. You could build a reputation similar to ebay and if you had a growing number of issues, others would see it reflected here. I think only your trade standing reputation should show publicly though so that you could make trades without revealing the items involved. This would help when trying to make trades for gift coins, etc. If something like this were built would you be willing to use it? If not, why not?

 

I would use it and probably feel better about trading as well as who I am trading with.

[ELTADA]

Just a thought, but why not build in a public trade-center? A simple trade-wizard type format. You can initialize a trade, both parties have a chance to sign in and enter there items of trade, both parties sign out with a review upon receiving their items. A review could a be a simple 1-5 scale rating for timeliness/item condition/communication, etc. It wouldn't be a mandatory system, but it would be a way to build a rating as a coin trader/vendor in good standing. You could build a reputation similar to ebay and if you had a growing number of issues, others would see it reflected here. I think only your trade standing reputation should show publicly though so that you could make trades without revealing the items involved. This would help when trying to make trades for gift coins, etc. If something like this were built would you be willing to use it? If not, why not?

 

Interesting idea...I think I would use it...would need to know more.

[ELTADA]

oh silly thing...dup post.

Edited January 22, 2009 by ELTADA

[Tooeygeotrashed]

Just a thought, but why not build in a public trade-center? A simple trade-wizard type format. You can initialize a trade, both parties have a chance to sign in and enter there items of trade, both parties sign out with a review upon receiving their items. A review could a be a simple 1-5 scale rating for timeliness/item condition/communication, etc. It wouldn't be a mandatory system, but it would be a way to build a rating as a coin trader/vendor in good standing. You could build a reputation similar to ebay and if you had a growing number of issues, others would see it reflected here. I think only your trade standing reputation should show publicly though so that you could make trades without revealing the items involved. This would help when trying to make trades for gift coins, etc. If something like this were built would you be willing to use it? If not, why not?

 

Sounds just the ticket to me, I would sign up and trade again on this basis.

[+-Eleanor-]

Just a thought, but why not build in a public trade-center? A simple trade-wizard type format. You can initialize a trade, both parties have a chance to sign in and enter there items of trade, both parties sign out with a review upon receiving their items. A review could a be a simple 1-5 scale rating for timeliness/item condition/communication, etc. It wouldn't be a mandatory system, but it would be a way to build a rating as a coin trader/vendor in good standing. You could build a reputation similar to ebay and if you had a growing number of issues, others would see it reflected here. I think only your trade standing reputation should show publicly though so that you could make trades without revealing the items involved. This would help when trying to make trades for gift coins, etc. If something like this were built would you be willing to use it? If not, why not?

 

Or something like on the ****tag site?

[+ECplus3]

Somebody could set up a Google spreadsheet to track trades. Of course, there is no way to require traders to even use it -- it would be completely voluntary. But if you just created the spreadsheet with these columns:

 

Party A (nick)

Party B (nick)

Trade finalized (date)

Party A satisfied (Y/N)

Party B satisfied (Y/N)

[+NeverSummer]

Maybe a set of guidelines for vendors would be helpful, but the vendors are also having problems. What then? A set of guidelines for the buyers to follow too?? And a committee?? I don't even like the sounds of that, sounds big brotherly to me! Are we then going to vote people in? Will we make the commitee up as a term-limit type thing (say, let them sit on the committee for 2 years...4??). And just what would this committee do? What authority would they hold?

 

Seems like a HUGE hassle and not much help, but just MHO. Maybe I'm missing something and someone can set me straight, but....

 

Eartha posted an important part of the guidelines that I'm sure won't change. The process of vendors getting/not getting their money (or other issues) is between the vendor and their customers. Groundspeak offers a service with tracking codes, and the availability to post sales on the forum. That's about it. Now, because there is very little relationship between buyer and GS, that is why that guideline exists. Vendors are not GS representatives, so they must hold themselves accountable to their business.

 

For instance, if I own a toy shop, and someone steals my Hot Wheels cars, I don't go to Mattel and ask them to step in. I have to figure out how to secure my products to protect myself from unethical buyers. On the flip side, if I am a Hot Wheel collector, and I go to the store to get a car that was promised by the shop owner to be in stock, and which I had already paid for, but is not there, I can contact the owner of the shop. If that is not resolved, then I can contact Mattel to let them know that they have a vendor who is promising on something they have not delivered. (Now, now, don't tear this analogy apart. I know that GS does not "produce" coins like a mint does, etc. This analogy wasn't about production, it was to illustrate a scenario...)

 

As for "help", if we are a community, we control our behaviors as a collective if we try to. And, if there is a simple process is place that gets vendors to a certain production point before advertising on this forum, it could be easy to monitor. (Perhaps it won't work out, but we could at least try...) We have 2 moderators in this forum, yes. But who knows, maybe GS can find a suitable trusted volunteer to help out with that step.

 

I mean, there are already people in charge of the coin approval process, so this would just be another step in that process. The good thing is, that the step from idea/art/approval to production/announcement/sale is typically a little spaced apart. So, it would spread out a little bit. I don't think it would be a bad idea for Groundspeak to ask for coins to be "ready" before they allow vendors to use THEIR forum to announce sales/remints/etc. It would be in their interest to protect themselves from unethical behavior and complaints, and help promote fair and clear sales and production. It would give a bit of shine back to geocoining, and buff out some tarnish on the process they ultimately control.

 

Just some more ideas...

[+fox-and-the-hound]

Just a thought, but why not build in a public trade-center? A simple trade-wizard type format. You can initialize a trade, both parties have a chance to sign in and enter there items of trade, both parties sign out with a review upon receiving their items. A review could a be a simple 1-5 scale rating for timeliness/item condition/communication, etc. It wouldn't be a mandatory system, but it would be a way to build a rating as a coin trader/vendor in good standing. You could build a reputation similar to ebay and if you had a growing number of issues, others would see it reflected here. I think only your trade standing reputation should show publicly though so that you could make trades without revealing the items involved. This would help when trying to make trades for gift coins, etc. If something like this were built would you be willing to use it? If not, why not?

 

Or something like on the ****tag site?

 

maybe

[+Eartha]

Groundspeak's policy:

Those choosing to participate in an exchange on this board take full responsibility for any consequences of that exchange. Groundspeak is in no way involved in the sale or trading of items on this board and will not be held responsible or liable in any way for quality issues, fraud or any default of transfer on the part of the buyer or seller.

 

Eartha, is it true that Groundspeak has suspended the sale of codes to vendors? If so -- and without naming names -- could you provide any insight as to why Groundspeak made the decision to do so?

 

Also, if Groundspeak is not interested in delinquent vendors, why is there a pinned feedback thread? Were you trying to get a sense of how widespread the problem was?

 

I do realize that the thread's complains are primarily about two companies, one of whom appears to be making good with the extremely delayed shipment of coins, so it is quite possible that the problem might be pretty limited. Do you, with all of your experience in the Forums, think that it's worth the trouble to discuss ways to try to avoid this sort of thing in the future?

 

Groundspeak has removed several coinmakers from the approved list over time. We do not announce removals, just as we do not discuss the business dealings with these companies in public. All business between Groundspeak and the coinmakers is between them, and we moderators do not take part in those dealings. The only interaction we moderators have on the business end is to edit the pinned thread with the list in it, when Groundspeak tells us to. Because it was public knowledge posted by one coinmaker, I can say that in the past, Groundspeak did front one company the tracking numbers on a 90 day basis, in order for those coins to be produced, when the company had hard times. Groundspeak is responsible for selling the tracking numbers, and that is handled between Groundspeak and the coinmaker. None of it is handled by the forum moderators, or the forums. That's business, this is all geochat and geocoin advertising here. All sales transactions take place off site.

 

The pinned feedback thread was posted to allow those who were really delayed, versus those who were just chiming in, to post their delays and find out if there really was a problem. It will not stay pinned, unless a problem arises again, but the problem ended up being just a few coins, quite a few buyers, and two companies, both of whom are now following through. The problem was not as widespread as the original threads made it sound. It was a problem, but it wasn't a HUGE problem.

 

The current economy has hit geocoins very hard, I see it here every day. When the economy started sliding, the "Selling my collection" threads started popping up right and left, along with all the sob stories that would break you heart, used to convince people to buy those coins, instead of someone else's. People should choose to make smart decisions on what coins they buy, and how they buy them with their hard earned money.

[+opalsns]

I'm not sure if this has come up yet, but

There is a list up in the pinned thread of cachers, what they ordered and paid for and Didn't get.

What about a or page for each vender or coiner that they could list the coin they are selling and one has to sign on to the sheet with there order.

The seller marks when they recieve payment and the date it's mailed and then the buyer logs when it's recieved. I do this on my books when selling coins.

And Delivery confirmation should be used on all sales in the US.

I read some said the post office only scanned half the number and the lost package can't be tracked. That's bull.

If the scan doesn't pick up the entire number, it shows error.

Opalsns

[+Eartha]

I'm not sure if this has come up yet, but

There is a list up in the pinned thread of cachers, what they ordered and paid for and Didn't get.

What about a or page for each vender or coiner that they could list the coin they are selling and one has to sign on to the sheet with there order.

The seller marks when they recieve payment and the date it's mailed and then the buyer logs when it's recieved. I do this on my books when selling coins.

And Delivery confirmation should be used on all sales in the US.

I read some said the post office only scanned half the number and the lost package can't be tracked. That's bull.

If the scan doesn't pick up the entire number, it shows error.

Opalsns

 

See my post above yours.

[+opalsns]

Edited January 22, 2009 by opalsns

[+tsunrisebey]

 

What about a or page for each vender or coiner that they could list the coin they are selling and one has to sign on to the sheet with there order.

The seller marks when they recieve payment and the date it's mailed and then the buyer logs when it's recieved. I do this on my books when selling coins.

And Delivery confirmation should be used on all sales in the US.

I read some said the post office only scanned half the number and the lost package can't be tracked. That's bull.

If the scan doesn't pick up the entire number, it shows error.

Opalsns

 

Have ya lost your wee mind?

* I don't want a page and I don't need a page-I have websites and email for that.

* I have very little free time as it is, I ain't coming to a page on Groundspeak and logging coins shipped/recvd pymnt, etc. I do that on my own and so does paypal (sends notice).

* Delivery comp. doesn't work for all US addys. Example, I ship to someone in MO whose addy is listed as Glendale (city) but it won't allow me to print out a shipping lable unless I change it to Saint Louis (I'm not comfortable doing that cause it's my responsibilty if it doesn't make it) and when people ship to me delivery comp. it often says delivered when it has only arrived in Billings, MT which is about a 4 hour drive from but a USPS hub. Then it leaves again.... delivery comp. is only good for telling you that it has arrived somewhere and there are cases of where it doesn't get scanned, I've seen that too. It happens.

 

Please people, quit trying to make more work for some of us. When you all run your own geocoin business, you go ahead and do all these fine plans you are trying to set up, form your committees, etc. and then let me know how it's working for you. It never ceases to amaze me the amount of work some will try to make for others. Any of you making all these wonderful suggestions notice how most vendors don't even reply to this thread? They are busy with their businesses and lives, I'm just stupid that I just keep coming back for more Sometimes a little common sense goes a long way. I think for the most part alot of people know who to watch out for these days and I'm sure the newbs will catch on quickly.

[+opalsns]

WELL EXCUSSSSSSSEEEEEE MMMMEEEEEEE!

So sorry for posting an idea,

I promise I won't let my WEE mind screw up your life again.

OPALSNS

[+tsunrisebey]

WELL EXCUSSSSSSSEEEEEE MMMMEEEEEEE!

So sorry for posting an idea,

I promise I won't let my WEE mind screw up your life again.

OPALSNS

 

I'm reading a Scottish book, I wanted to use the word 'wee'. Hey if you're going to post suggestions or comment, you gotta be able to take the heat. Lord knows I have to all the time and usually int he form of emails and I'm still here posting away. Now cowboy up.

[+-Eleanor-]

I agree with tsun in that it doesn't make any sense to ask established vendors to do more work just because other vendors were unable to effectively run their business. Even if was in place, you would still have the deadbeats not posting updates and the honest ones following the rules. The pinned topic at the top is effective in that it points out the vendors that are having issues. There are going to be people that don't read that thread and end up screwed, you can't force everyone to read it. Maybe GS should start forcing warning labels in the signature of 'those' vendors to further help save the naive from evil

[+opalsns]

It was an Idea.

This thread asked for IDEAS.

It wasn't directed at anyone.

I didn't need to be insulted.

That was RUDE.

[+The Moop Along]

almost like haiku

but then that would be three lines

and less syllables

[+MustangJoni]

We really want our Geocoin vendors doing what they do best, which is making Geocoins.

 

We also need to quit making bad guys out of the people who call out the disreputable vendors. And people, you need to stop spending your money with them! They have already shown that in hard times, they are willing to take the money and run, ignore request for updates, which really irks me when they opened a thread to sell the darn coin. Why risk it?

 

But lets not hassle the honest, hardworking vendors. They are in the majority. Let them keep on making great coins!

[+opalsns]

I agree with tsun in that it doesn't make any sense to ask established vendors to do more work just because other vendors were unable to effectively run their business. Even if was in place, you would still have the deadbeats not posting updates and the honest ones following the rules. The pinned topic at the top is effective in that it points out the vendors that are having issues. There are going to be people that don't read that thread and end up screwed, you can't force everyone to read it. Maybe GS should start forcing warning labels in the signature of 'those' vendors to further help save the naive from evil

 

Maybe!!

[+NeverSummer]

We really want our Geocoin vendors doing what they do best, which is making Geocoins.

 

We also need to quit making bad guys out of the people who call out the disreputable vendors. And people, you need to stop spending your money with them! They have already shown that in hard times, they are willing to take the money and run, ignore request for updates, which really irks me when they opened a thread to sell the darn coin. Why risk it?

 

But lets not hassle the honest, hardworking vendors. They are in the majority. Let them keep on making great coins!

I agree. I've purchased more coins through well-designed websites and been very happy. I really do wonder what Groundspeak thinks of all the hubub. I mean, if tsun gets a coin out, I've noticed that the coin sales are handled on the website, and the rest is a done deal. People get their coins and know where to go to get up-to-the-minute updates. And that's really how most transactions go, thus the "trusted user" status of vendors like that. It's when someone starts up with an idea as an individual or as a new "company" and might not have the production and preparation know-how to communicate well.

 

This is where I, personally, wonder if GS wouldn't just ask for some kind of defined production and sale information. That way, they have a record of what was promised and don't have to wade through the forums and angry emails to find out the details.

 

I don't want to poke a hornet's nest here floating an idea that vendors might have to take on an extra step. If they don't want the extra step, perhaps they don't have to use the forums to promote their sales until coins are in hand. In most cases, though, the coin vendors know their production time line, and it would be a cut-and-paste process to get TPTB what they need to protect their assets and patrons.

 

If some kind of peace of mind is what the buying community (geocachers and partrons of Groundspeak's business) and Groundspeak itself wants, then I don't know why it couldn't be a stipulation of doing business with GS.

 

If GS has the limited responsibility to geocoin production, as stated in the guidelines, it really is up to the buying community, patrons of this website and Groundspeak to decide what needs to happen to protect interests. GS is not a coin selling platform. They provide services for location-based gaming. So, if buyers need want protections, they lobby GS to help them out, since we are keeping them in business. Vendors are free to operate outside of GS and the forum and give a geocaching-related product to the community...like a bison tube or waterproof logbook.

 

Commercial interests should feel fortunate that they are allowed to advertise in this forum, considering the legal and conflict of interest issues that could arise for Groundspeak. Personal coins are one thing, but when a new company pops up with an approved coin design and asks for our money and then doesn't deliver or communicate in a timely fashion, we end up with lots and lots of angry people...

 

And just to be safe here, let's calm down with the bad blood forming in this thread. If you have a personal issue, handle it personally. Let's keep up the positive brainstorming and constructive conversations instead.

[+DresselDragons]

We really want our Geocoin vendors doing what they do best, which is making Geocoins.

 

We also need to quit making bad guys out of the people who call out the disreputable vendors. And people, you need to stop spending your money with them! They have already shown that in hard times, they are willing to take the money and run, ignore request for updates, which really irks me when they opened a thread to sell the darn coin. Why risk it?

 

But lets not hassle the honest, hardworking vendors. They are in the majority. Let them keep on making great coins!

Amen!

[+NeverSummer]

...and on "Committees"...

I think this thread is our committee. It represents vendors, moderators and buyers. Seems like we can just meet in this thread and discuss. If you don't want to say anything, then don't...but this is the thread to try and get your ideas out.

 

A "committee" would be silly, and WAY too hard to elect/appoint, etc. Plus, once the guidelines are either updated, revised, deleted or left alone there is no need for the discussion to continue unless the system appears broken again.

 

I think this is going well...and that is just my opinion...as long as we don't take things too personally or start calling individuals out...or using sarcasm, which is very hard to articulate in a high-energy typed forum like this.

 

Open ended. Nothing personal. Just ideas. Discuss.

[+tsunrisebey]

It was an Idea.

This thread asked for IDEAS.

It wasn't directed at anyone.

I didn't need to be insulted.

That was RUDE.

 

I wasn't trying to be rude, I was trying to joke around a bit. I don't ever recall outright being rude to anyone on the threads. I guess I should have used a smiley so you would understand. I also called myself stupid in the same post but I'm not upset with myself I knew I was only teasing myself

 

Seeing that I'm just banging my head against the wall here and that it is now starting to frustrate me, I honorably bow out of the conversation. Think I'll go back to my cave and let the masses "fix" the system

 

Steve.... (don't know if you'll read this or not). You were right.

[+ThirstyMick]

I tried to read the whole thread, I really did. But just reading it was exhausting! I know there are problems that come up but I don't think we need to burden reputable sellers with more work. Most of us know who to stay away from by now. True, new people will come in and not know whos who, but I believe Groundspeak did take appropriate action by not selling any new numbers/not approving new designs from at least one company until they could catch up.

 

Maybe new vendors should have sort of a provisional period before they can become "approved" vendors where they need to jump through some of the hoops that I can't even get myself to read through (above) but certainly established and trusted vendors don't need to be given any more work. The two that I can think of that have had problems seemed to have issues right from the get-go. True one of them was around a lot longer with a good reputation, but as an artist, not as a vendor.

 

I know I (though I never really thought about it that way) impose my own personal provisional period with new vendors, where I watch and see what happens with their first few coins. It takes a little bit of time to earn my trust. Anymore, at least.

Edited January 22, 2009 by ThirstyMick

[+NeverSummer]

 

Steve.... (don't know if you'll read this or not). You were right.

Steve JOBS?! Wow!

 

But seriously, tsun, thank you for your time and input! I hope that you change your mind and continue to weigh in. Diverse opinions are important, and are valuable if things change/don't change with the guidelines.

[+opalsns]

Thirsty Mick,

I NEVER said anybody's name.

I thought this was a thread for IDEAS reguarding BAD vending techniques and what could be done .

Who the heck mentioned any good , reputable members??????

As a matter of fact, WHO mentioned any names at all ????????

Good Grief!!!!

 

Tsun,

NOW I understand. It was Just your Wee Way of joking, OH!!!!!! You should have told me your just a Wee joker!!!!!! Silly Girl.

NO HARD FEELINGS !!!!!!!!

Opalsns

Edited January 22, 2009 by opalsns

[+NeverSummer]

<snip>

Also... I think most vendors work hard enough as it is, and I'm sure they TRY to please everyone, adding more to their workload shouldn't be an option. If anything, if we as a community could make their jobs easier, they may get to concentrate on putting out more better products. Yes.. more better!

True, but advertising a new coin on this forum really is more of a privilege than a right. Groundspeak runs this forum and has advertisements on the main pages for businesses to advertise their wares. Vendors should run their business the way they see fit. But when it pours onto a third party's web forum, there is a problem if those vendors are messing about.

 

I guess, as I am not a vendor and have not produced a coin yet, I don't understand where the unbelievable extra efforts are in asking for a trial period, production details, timeline details or to wait until coins are in hand, before advertising on Groundspeak's forum (these are "or", not "and"). I'm not trying to call anyone out. If you can help me (and others) understand, that would help shape the conversation.

 

IF I were a vendor, I would insist on running MY business the best I see fit. If that conflicted with how someone else WANTED me to run my business, who is going to ultimately win out? I know putting forth suggestions on how people do that thing they do is a good idea in theory, but not everyone is going to be pleased ALL the time. <snip>

If the "buyers" and/or Groundspeak feel there is a need to protect the ethical use of this forum, then businesses can chose to follow guidelines, or promote elsewhere. It just seems that with so many new coin makers coming out each week there should be some kind of process to foster good, ethical use of this forum and respect for the customers who use this service. </asbestos suit engaged>

[+ThirstyMick]

Thirsty Mick,

I NEVER said anybody's name.

I thought this was a thread for IDEAS reguarding BAD vending techniques and what could be done .

Who the heck mentioned any good , reputable members??????

As a matter of fact, WHO mentioned any names at all ????????

Good Grief!!!!

 

Tsun,

NOW I understand. It was Just your Wee Way of joking, OH!!!!!! You should have told me your just a Wee joker!!!!!! Silly Girl.

NO HARD FEELINGS !!!!!!!!

Opalsns

 

Whoa, little wound up are we? I wasn't talking about whatever you said. I'm pretty sure I mentioned that I didn't couldn't even read most the thread.

 

I removed the sentence where I mentioned names of reputable sellers. I had only used examples b/c i couldn't think of a better way to phrase the sentence, to express the point i was trying to make. It had nothing to do with you and wasn't even meant to be negative toward anyone.

 

I guess I'll go away now.

[+opalsns]

Thirsty Mick,

Well then I am sorry. I was wound up thinking it was directed to me. And I couldn't understand why.

It was posted just at that time, you know what I mean, in the same time frame that other posts had come in.

When and If you do read the previous posts, I'm sure you'll see what I mean.

Don't go away on my account. That would be Childish.

You meant no harm, and I appologized.

Opalsns

[+Rockin Roddy]

Ok, let's all calm downa dn get back to friendly discussion!! No sense in getting worked up about this!

[+tsunrisebey]

NeverSummer,

 

I did want to contribute one more suggestion to this thread and then I promise I'm done

 

ON the way home from work, I stopped at Target and picked up a couple things for myself and the dogs. It gave me some time to reflect on much of what has been said here.

 

I have decided to form a geocoin vendor committee. I have elected myself President, Treasurer and VP too Since I have been actively engaging in this forum and trying to be helpful in other forums, given away ALOT of coins over the course of 2 years it is my decision that in anticipation of the time spent here and in other threads and possibly having additional duties added to my geocoin business that I will now charge a dollar more per coin, possibly more depending on how much more I may have to assist the geocoin community If you are currently not a customer but you have participated in this thread or even read this thread, I will be sending you a paypal invoice for possibly having to deal with you or thinking about being your geocoin vendor. Charges for unruly customers, readers and particpaters will be $2.00 per coin more. Please act accordingly.

 

I will also be sending my committee meeting notes to the other vendors and suggesting that they now charge more for possibly all the additional things they might have to do :D

 

Have yourselves a wonderful wee evening. I can't wait to see my paypal account shoot to the moon now that I have instituted these changes

Edited January 23, 2009 by tsunrisebey

[+MustangJoni]

NeverSummer,

 

I did want to contribute one more suggestion to this thread and then I promise I'm done

 

ON the way home from work, I stopped at Target and picked up a couple things for myself and the dogs. It gave me some time to reflect on much of what has been said here.

 

I have decided to form a geocoin vendor committee. I have elected myself President, Treasurer and VP too Since I have been actively engaging in this forum and trying to be helpful in other forums, given away ALOT of coins over the course of 2 years it is my decision that in anticipation of the time spent here and in other threads and possibly having additional duties added to my geocoin business that I will now charge a dollar more per coin, possibly more depending on how much more I may have to assist the geocoin community If you are currently not a customer but you have participated in this thread or even read this thread, I will be sending you a paypal invoice for possibly having to deal with you or thinking about being your geocoin vendor. Charges for unruly customers, readers and particpaters will be $2.00 per coin more. Please act accordingly.

 

I will also be sending my committee meeting notes to the other vendors and suggesting that they now charge more for possibly all the additional things they might have to do :D

 

Have yourselves a wonderful wee evening. I can't wait to see my paypal account shoot to the moon now that I have instituted these changes

 

Can I pay $20 because I'm so darned unruly?

[+Jackalgirl]

I'd buy into a buyer's guide. I think that's a pretty good idea. It does seem that the problems are fairly limited (and Groundspeak took their own forms of action), so there probably doesn't need to be a concerted effort to get Groundspeak to change what they're doing. Instead, I agree that buyer education is a good idea.

 

Would it be appropriate to place such a document on the trackable coins wiki?

[+NeverSummer]

NeverSummer,

 

I did want to contribute one more suggestion to this thread and then I promise I'm done

 

ON the way home from work, I stopped at Target and picked up a couple things for myself and the dogs. It gave me some time to reflect on much of what has been said here.

 

I have decided to form a geocoin vendor committee. I have elected myself President, Treasurer and VP too Since I have been actively engaging in this forum and trying to be helpful in other forums, given away ALOT of coins over the course of 2 years it is my decision that in anticipation of the time spent here and in other threads and possibly having additional duties added to my geocoin business that I will now charge a dollar more per coin, possibly more depending on how much more I may have to assist the geocoin community If you are currently not a customer but you have participated in this thread or even read this thread, I will be sending you a paypal invoice for possibly having to deal with you or thinking about being your geocoin vendor. Charges for unruly customers, readers and particpaters will be $2.00 per coin more. Please act accordingly.

 

I will also be sending my committee meeting notes to the other vendors and suggesting that they now charge more for possibly all the additional things they might have to do :D

 

Have yourselves a wonderful wee evening. I can't wait to see my paypal account shoot to the moon now that I have instituted these changes

er...huh?

 

I'm assuming a bit of snark here...so I'm not sure...umm...yeah...

 

back on topic...