Minimum Posts

[flamatrix99]

I was wondering if there has been any consideration to making a minimum posting requirement before posting for sale preventing things like this:

http://www.bayoushooter.com/forums/showthread.php?t=18099

Just an idea.

 

[TDH]

A lot of forums require 50 posts. It weeds out some of the people that don't contribute to the sight and just use it as a online classified, but at the same time some people just run up their posts really quick in order to post in the classifieds. I was guilty of it myself on another forum. I have been reading that forum for several years but only had like 10 posts. So I went to the picture thread and posted stuff like, "looks nice," "good job," "what holster is that," and etc.

It definitely adds a hurdle though. It will weed out some people but not all of them. I personally don't have a problem with a local board as you are much less likely to get ripped off doing FTF deals, but I understand the reasoning. Not sure I really have an opinion one way or the other

 

[aroundlsu]

Minimum post requirements are highly annoying. I wanted to sell something on another website a few months ago and couldn't. So I gave up and haven't been back to that site since.

 

[parallel]

IMO post count has little (if anything) to do with whether or not someone selling something is trustworthy. Not to mention, for those who are having a hard time finding ammo, I am guessing that they would be glad that the ad in question was posted.

 

[topgunz1]

one site i just joined makes you do 5 posts in a hidden forum before you can access the full site. it was very annoying, and they still get spam posts.

 

[Bearco]

 

[Speedlace]

It accomplishes nothing, but promotes post whoring.

"Your # of post indicated how trustworthy, intellegant, and committed you are."

 

[geauxbubba]

Maybe a time delay before selling, like after 30 days of being a member? Just a thought.

 

[NitroX]

I was wondering if there has been any consideration to making a minimum posting requirement before posting for sale preventing things like this:

http://www.bayoushooter.com/forums/showthread.php?t=18099

Just an idea.

Is the post you are referring to a bad deal or something?
Or you just don't like his 1st post is something for sale?
I'm not a 7.62 guy so I'm not up on the price he has listed.
If it's a good deal then why not, and if it's not a good deal then
no one buys right.

IMO sorta better than someone that's a premium member and only shows up only to sell a bunch of stuff then *poof* again.

 

[CajunTim]

To each his own, I see no problem with it. I still feel all for sale items should be posted in the premium members section for 72 hours before they are posted for all to see.

 

[spanky]

There have been a few people who do that (come on just to buy or sell) and end up becoming productive members.

 

[NitroX]

To each his own, I see no problem with it. I still feel all for sale items should be posted in the premium members section for 72 hours before they are posted for all to see.

Why?

 

[CajunTim]

Gives people more of a reason to donate/become a paid member to the site if they get first shot at deals

 

[NitroX]

Gives people more of a reason to donate/become a paid member to the site if they get first shot at deals

Meh, that's what site sponsors are for. When you try to force a donation to do this or that then you may as well just make everyone pay for everything.
JMHO

 

[BayouSlide]

I don't think a minimum post count would make much difference. FWIW, I'm often buying gear I need and selling what I don't need anymore on a number of forums. I've run into more flaky buyers here in my short time here than in all the other boards I'm a member of...never a rip off, mind you, just buyers never completing the deal they committed to.

 

[whbonney26]

I dont see a problem with it either. Esp if its local f2f deals. Some people are just not the kind to hang around forums. I have seen some pretty good deals come across different sites from people who had something that fit the needs of a certain community of the site they posted on. They found the sites through google or where ever and sold their item and was never heard from again.

I think min post counts are a pain in the butt. I know that I have went to a couple sites where I knew I would have a market for my item just to sell it but had no desire to talk about that kind of stuff on their forum.

 

[rgswamp]

The downside to a post requirement is for people like me. I don't post much, but rather spend the time to absorb info from lots of people I consider more knowledgable than I. I'm sure there are others like that also. But I wouldn't care for a restriction in case I do want to use the marketplace. Just a thought........

 

[CavalryJim]

I am for any rules (or lack of rules) that makes for more reasonably priced guns, ammo, etc. for me to buy.

 

[BayouSlide]

I am for any rules (or lack of rules) that makes for more reasonably priced guns, ammo, etc. for me to buy.

I think I could safely say we'd all vote for that ticket

 

[dfsutton]

I don't think a minimum post count would make much difference. FWIW, I'm often buying gear I need and selling what I don't need anymore on a number of forums. I've run into more flaky buyers here in my short time here than in all the other boards I'm a member of...never a rip off, mind you, just buyers never completing the deal they committed to.

My opinion would be that if a deal isn't completed that was agreed to then Negative feedback. Unless there is some really extenuating circumstance. But that would be up to the people involved.

I only tried to sell one item here, had a bad experience with the buyer while meeting FTF (tried to short me on the $$$ we agreed to and said he would get back to me to meet again). I waited for several days and never heard back from the guy. I gave up and sold it to some guy off another forum.