Kicking out members with constant negative references.

[starslayer]

Ive seen members with 4 or more negative references here. I think after you have a certain number of negatives, you should be booted from Bartertown. Do we want members who have a proven history of lying, conning, & basically screwing over people- to remain a member here? Thats exactly the kind of person we dont want here.
I think if you have 5 negative refeences- you should be gone. A person with that record is not responsible enough to be here.

One thing Id like to see is a red X under a members name for every negative they have. That would be an easy way to see if they are reliable or not.

[oaflord]

One thing Id like to see is a red X under a members name for every negative they have. That would be an easy way to see if they are reliable or not.

oAF

[starslayer]

Great!! That's exactly what I'm thinking. Now if we can just think of an insult that begins with the letter 'A'.......hmmmmm.......

[spiralingcadaver]

Well, I think that something like that could work, if it were based on some sort of mod approval (so no retaliatory negatives, for instance). I know that if I saw one, I'd be wary, but if they had what I wanted, I'd just be sure to be sure I got my end first (unless they looked genuinely crooked).

[MagickalMemories]

We already provide a way for people to see how reliable you are. It takes very little time to hit the link to references & scroll through, looking for the bright red highlights. I see no good reason to emblazon it on their profile.

As for bannings based on references... it depends on the situation. I refuse to paint anyone with the same broad brush based on the fact that they have negatives, regardless of what they're for.

Eric

[themailedfist]

I sort of feel like banning folks outright is just asking for them to try and sneak back in somehow (multi-accounts, friends email, et al). Better that you KNOW they can be flakes than not feeling like you can trust anyone with 0 feedback.

--Robert

[MagickalMemories]

There will always be people who sneak back in after being banned. There are numerous ways around it.

That said, staff (and members) here have long memories. We catch multi-accounters regularly. There are people who've multi-accounted for months or years who we eventually caught up with. It's just a matter of time. More are sooner than later, however.

Eric

[spiralingcadaver]

Thoughts on some sort of temporary "infraction" mark? I.e., if they've messed up in the last 6 months, there's a mark? That way, that one newb mistake won't haunt you forever, but there's still an indicator of "maybe you should watch out"?

[MagickalMemories]

It's all in the references. If you're doing the right thing and checking up on your trade partners, you'll see if they've got that. It's why the ref's are there.

Eric

[Forsaken Poptart]

I sort of feel like banning folks outright is just asking for them to try and sneak back in somehow (multi-accounts, friends email, et al). Better that you KNOW they can be flakes than not feeling like you can trust anyone with 0 feedback.

--Robert

I trust everyone with zero feedback- I just require them to ship first. If that's no good for them, they're welcome to try their luck elsewhere. I've had no problems so far. Really, the same goes for anyone with a negative review.