status-resolved Allowing members to bid on auctions when they meet certain criteria..

[NameOmnia]

Hi,

my suggestion is to allow new members to bid on auctions only after they meet some criteria ( to be set by mods and admins ).

As an example : a member who has joined that same day, hasn't participated in any discussion and ( most likely ) hasn't read any rules shouldn't be allowed to place bids.
I have seen several times these new members join, place random and quite high bids then puff..no trace of them.

I think it would benefit the entire forum if the ability to bid were put "on hold" until members are considered verified or established or whatever else the admins decide.

Thank you for your time.
Sara

 

[Eric Lyon]

A seller is already allowed to outline qualifications for those participating in their auction.
Rule reminder:

6.2.9. Reserving the right to decline a bid is only allowed if stated before the auction's first bid, is enacted before the auction has ended, and includes a fair reason.

E.g.
To bid on my auction you must meet the following criteria:
1. Member for more than 60 days.
2. Have a minimum of 2 positive feedback and no negative feedback.
3. Have a minimum of 100 posts
Etc...

Keep in mind that the more restrictions you add on your auctions, the less investors that will be able to bid, potentially rendering an auction to end with only 1 or 2 bids instead of 20 bids because the other members didn't qualify.

Also keep in mind that just because an investor is new on NamePros, it doesn't mean that they are new to the industry or that they don't have the funds to pay.

 

[NameOmnia]

Yes I am aware of the fact that I can decide who can bid or not but imo a solution could and should be implemented at a forum level.

Keep in mind that the more restrictions you add on your auctions, the less investors that will be able to bid, potentially rendering an auction to end with only 1 or 2 bids instead of 20 bids because the other members didn't qualify.

I am aware of that too. Personally I prefer 2 serious bidders over 20 that I am not sure of but that could be easily avoided if, as I mentioned above, some restrictions were implemented forum wise.

 

[gareth1614]

Hi,

my suggestion is to allow new members to bid on auctions only after they meet some criteria ( to be set by mods and admins ).

As an example : a member who has joined that same day, hasn't participated in any discussion and ( most likely ) hasn't read any rules shouldn't be allowed to place bids.
I have seen several times these new members join, place random and quite high bids then puff..no trace of them.

I think it would benefit the entire forum if the ability to bid were put "on hold" until members are considered verified or established or whatever else the admins decide.

Thank you for your time.
Sara

I would have to agree. It might be a good idea to have a blanket criteria which would apply to all (not much, maybe just that a person has a decent reputation or has posted a certain amount). I only say this as I have recently been a victim of a new member winning my auction then disappearing.

 

[Eric Lyon]

I would have to agree. It might be a good idea to have a blanket criteria which would apply to all (not much, maybe just that a person has a decent reputation or has posted a certain amount). I only say this as I have recently been a victim of a new member winning my auction then disappearing.

Please be sure to report any non-paying winners. All sales / bids are binding agreements. We actively investigate and enforce binding agreements.

Thanks,

 

[NameOmnia]

All sales / bids are binding agreements. We actively investigate and enforce binding agreements.

Would you mind explaining how the forum enforces agreements?

Sending out infractions, suspending accounts or closing them do not fall under the definition of enforcement as members are not really forced to honour their bids or sell their domains.

My last auction was completely messed up by a very new member who not only ignored my requirements and placed his bids, but also threatened to blacklist my domains on a Chinese forum and even took the right to PM the other bidders informing them that he was the one buying the domains.

All this after I publicly replied to him saying his bids weren't accepted as per OP. Clearly it wasn't enough for him.

As a consequence ( or maybe not ) an established member decided to retract his bids ( weren't they binding? ) and, you can check it yourself, the bids are still retracted.
I involved moderators.

When I asked how to proceed I was told that my auction should have now started from a bid that was placed 5 days before (apparently the binding bids can't be really enforced can they ) ...wait what?
Not only my auction was messed up by a new member and bids from an established member were retracted in full violation of the rules, but I was now asked by a moderator to restart my auction from a bid placed so long before that the auction itself would have been almost closed and the name undersold.

Luckily enough another member placed a bid and saved the auction but if that didn't happen I would have had to undersell my domain.

Honestly I am not really impressed.

All marketplaces have some sort of buyer / seller verification systems and we can assume that there are reasons for that. Now, NP does not have any and forbidding brand new members to bid until they are verified as reliable should be a must; on top of that accounts of members who do not honour their bids/sales/transactions should be suspended regardless to how established they are.
It is a common practice applied by any major marketplace : if you bid and don't pay or sell and don't push/transfer you get suspended. Simple.

Looking forward to your feedback.

 

[wwwweb]

I agree for anyone just to signup, start placing bids without consequence of messing up something that has been going on for days, and especially with fast moving liquid domains, they can cause sellers serious financial ramifications.

There should be a 15 day break in window, before new members can start to bid, this way they can contribute, learn, and understand the rules of the forum.

Overall the community as a whole would benefit with some internal controls to restrict any random signup from causing havoc. Some of these auctions, and domains now are reaching into 4-5 figures, this is serious money in play, many times sellers are looking for quick liquidity for more of a wholesale price on such forums, and having someone who has no reputation to lose come, and make bids, and not have to honor it, can really muck things up.

The above auction I saw first hand, as one of the top bidders retracted their bids, when the new bidder started making threats, and who knows how far those threats could go. Essentially the seller was getting screwed as they had this outsider making serious threats to devalue their domains, causing them lost bids, and future bidders to think twice. I don't know if this person was reprimanded but their threats showed bad faith from day 1, and they bring no value to the forum overall.

 

[Eric Lyon]

Would you mind explaining how the forum enforces agreements?

Keep in mind that NamePros does not handle any transactions, we are a 3rd party platform that provides a forum area where members conduct business between themselves. Domain transfers and payments are handled by the members and their designated registrars and payment processors. NamePros has no involvement in that.

With the above said, please refer to the below example as to how we generally handle an agreement:
1) A seller lists there domain for sale in auction format
2) A potential buyer bids in the thread
3) after several bids, the auction ends on the date specified in the listing
4) The high bidder wins and either the seller or winner start a message to the other privately so they can initiate the transaction.
5) As outlined in the rules, members have up to 7 days to initiate a transaction by default unless otherwise stated in the sales listing by the seller.
6) Winner pays seller
7) Seller transfers/pushes domain
8) Done

With the above in mind:
A) A bid is a binding agreement and may not be retracted. (Unless)
1) We do understand that accidents happen and may allow a bidder to correct their mistake within a very short 1 to 5 minute window. Anything longer than that is no longer seen as accidental (Wrong thread) bids.
2) If a seller provides false information, all bids are void and the seller will be reprimanded.
B) Sellers are bound to sell to the high bidder at the end of the auction and may not refuse to sell. (Unless)
1) The high bidder did not meet the criteria outlined by the seller for an authorized bid. In this instance, the next highest bidder that did meet the criteria wins.

Handling a breach of agreement:
1) Seller or winner reports the deal as being in breach of a binding sales agreement.
2) Staff member investigates to see which party is at fault and to gather more details.
3) A rule reminder is sent to the member in breach of the agreement reminding them they have up to 7 days to initiate the transaction and honor the agreement.
4) If the 7 days has already been reached, a final 24 to 48 hour notice is sent to the member, normally in a 3 way conversations so that staff can mediate between the two members and try to assist in closing the deal. This final notice reiterates the binding agreement rule and the bad business infraction that may or may not limit the members access to NamePros if they fail to honor the agreement.
5) If the agreement is still not honored in the final notice time frame, a bad business infraction is issued. In some cases, this 15 point infraction will be the first they ever received in their time as a NamePros member and will serve as a stern reminder not to break the rules again. In other cases, where a member has had other infractions that are still active, it may automatically limit their access to NamePros so that they can no longer participate in the marketplace.

Note: The above is what happens in a common breach of agreement case. Each case is handled differently depending on the situation. In cases involving more serious matters, accounts are restricted immediately during the investigation process.

I hope that helps give you a general idea on the process with the example I provided. We believe in second chances and understand that members may make mistakes from time to time. Many of the offenses do not warrant banning. For the most part, members do try to conduct business ethically so that they can keep their reputation intact, since they are normally fully aware that a tarnished reputation can ruin their domain investing career instantly.

As a 3rd party platform, we encourage members to utilize the member Feedback/Review system. Whether you had a good or bad experience with a member, the feedback system helps share a members business history with others that are considering doing business with them. This system is your first line of investigative defense when deciding on who you should do business with and who you should avoid.

Hope that helps,
Have a great day.

 

[NameOmnia]

If you add this

The above auction I saw first hand, as one of the top bidders retracted their bids, when the new bidder started making threats, and who knows how far those threats could go. Essentially the seller was getting screwed as they had this outsider making serious threats to devalue their domains, causing them lost bids, and future bidders to think twice. I don't know if this person was reprimanded but their threats showed bad faith from day 1, and they bring no value to the forum overall.

to this

When I asked how to proceed I was told that my auction should have now started from a bid that was placed 5 days before (apparently the binding bids can't be really enforced can they ) ...wait what?
Not only my auction was messed up by a new member and bids from an established member were retracted in full violation of the rules, but I was now asked by a moderator to restart my auction from a bid placed so long before that the auction itself would have been almost closed and the name undersold.

you can easily understand how something in the overall process simply does not flow.
.
I think that in a case like this I should have offered to either close the auction or make it restart from the valid bid BUT as if it were placed that moment ( with 5 days left ).
I declare it publicly now : if a situation like this occurs again I will simply refuse to accept the moderator's decision for it's too penalizing for the seller.
As things are handled case by case ( in your words ) I think my particular case should have been addressed differently; even other members who were bidding realized that my auction has been screwed up.


As for this

B) Sellers are bound to sell to the high bidder at the end of the auction and may not refuse to sell. (Unless)
1) The high bidder did not meet the criteria outlined by the seller for an authorized bid. In this instance, the next highest bidder that did meet the criteria wins.

I believe that in a recent case when the high bidder didn't pay you, Eric, told me that I could offer the domain to the second high bidder ( who, btw, never replied to my pm ) but that he wasn't forced to accept it. Previously you told me that when the high bidder does not honour his bid the seller has the choice to either offer it to the second high bidder ( who is not forced to accept ) or re start the auction from the second last bid.

There is a lot of confusion and those aspects are not regulated publicly in the rules ( at least they weren't yesterday when I wrote my previous post ) so maybe it's time to clarify for everyone (?)

 

[Eric Lyon]

I believe that in a recent case when the high bidder didn't pay you, Eric, told me that I could offer the domain to the second high bidder ( who, btw, never replied to my pm ) but that he wasn't forced to accept it. Previously you told me that when the high bidder does not honour his bid the seller has the choice to either offer it to the second high bidder ( who is not forced to accept ) or re start the auction from the second last bid.

There is a lot of confusion and those aspects are not regulated publicly in the rules ( at least they weren't yesterday when I wrote my previous post ) so maybe it's time to clarify for everyone (?)

There's no confusion.

A. You can offer the domain that someone else won to the next high bidder if the winner defaulted on the agreement. The next highest bidder in most circumstances is not obligated to buy the domain since a winner was already announced and was bound to the agreement.

B. However, if a bid was placed that did not meet the criteria of the seller and was void instantly, then it doesn't count as a winning bid because it was instantly voided for not complying with a sellers outlined criteria to bid. In those cases, the next highest bidder (which technically was the only high bidder since the bid after theirs was instantly void) is bound to honor the agreement.

It's really not that hard to understand. Can you see the different between the 2 situations I pointed out above?

Note: as I noted before, not all sales transactions will have the exact same outcome due to multiple factors at play. because of the varying factors we can't blanket everyone's sales into 1 outcome. As you can see in A and B above, they are different situations and must be treated differently.

The examples I have given in this thread are for just one or 2 situations, they do not cover all situations. Please follow any instructions a staff member gives you during their investigation. Not all situations will result in the same outcome based on different variables.

Thanks for understanding,

 

[NameOmnia]

It's really not that hard to understand

In spite of your ( not so ) subliminal suggestion that I might be dense I do understand, thanks.

As for the 3rd time you avoided to address the "not that hard to understand" fact that a moderator decision would have penalized me even further I think it is pointless for me to continue this conversation.
I said it in the post before and I confirm it; if it happens again I will simply ignore any penalizing decision or instruction. Simple.

I am sure you understand.

 

[Eric Lyon]

We do realize that there are things that can be improved. It takes time, but we are actively working on it.

The above auction I saw first hand, as one of the top bidders retracted their bids, when the new bidder started making threats, and who knows how far those threats could go. Essentially the seller was getting screwed as they had this outsider making serious threats to devalue their domains, causing them lost bids, and future bidders to think twice. I don't know if this person was reprimanded but their threats showed bad faith from day 1, and they bring no value to the forum overall.

We will be adding the ability for sellers to control the content of their sales listings. This should help prevent incidents like this from getting out of hand. In the meantime, the sooner a seller (or any member) is able to report it, the sooner we can hopefully jump in and get the listing back on track.

In spite of your ( not so ) subliminal suggestion that I might be dense I do understand, thanks.

I apologize for the way my message may have come across. It was not my intention to imply that you may be dense.

As for the 3rd time you avoided to address the "not that hard to understand" fact that a moderator decision would have penalized me even further I think it is pointless for me to continue this conversation.
I said it in the post before and I confirm it; if it happens again I will simply ignore any penalizing decision or instruction. Simple.

If you feel a troublesome bidder has crashed your sales listings or thrown it off track, there's really only so much we can do to help, but we are happy to work with you to do what we can.

Depending on the circumstances, we may be able to offer several different options:

• Restart the auction in a new thread.
• Restart the auction in the existing thread.
• Cancel the existing thread and have you create a brand new one.
• Extend the current auction to see if anyone else will bid to get it back on track.
• And so on.

Each of these can only be offered in certain circumstances, and we'd need to evaluate it on a case-by-case basis to determine exactly which options we can provide. If you feel that the options we've provided aren't sufficient, then please explain your position and we'll see what we can do.

We are working to improve all of these things, but it's a lot of work and takes time. We hope to have some of the new features ready in a few weeks. They won't solve everything, but they'll be a good step in the right direction.

 

[korganian]

I have seen so many new members start auctions of their own on the same day they join the forum without even reading the rules first and their auctions are a complete disaster. There really needs to be some basic training requirement for new members to make sure they know what the auction rules are before they start their own auction. Maybe a quiz to prove they read the rules?

 

[Eric Lyon]

Maybe a quiz to prove they read the rules?

We were working on a pop-up box to confirm that they read the rules before creating a sales listing, but we haven't had a chance to finish it yet.

All in due time.

 

[Abdillahi Abdillahi]

Agreed with Korganian. I helped many new members and outlined what they need to include in the auction post. Some ignored and some accepted and I always reported.

 

[NameOmnia]

If you feel that the options we've provided aren't sufficient, then please explain your position and we'll see what we can do.

I have already explained it more than once so I am not going over it again; now the auction is closed and I will definitely think twice before listing anything else on the forum until I see some changes as the benefit of not paying marketplace fees does not compensate for the hassle and troubles. Let alone losing money.

I look forward to seeing these serious issues fixed and I will also keep an eye on the profile of the 2 members who deliberately screwed up my auction....who knows...maybe they will get suspended.

 

[Eric Lyon]

does not compensate for the hassle and troubles. Let alone losing money.

You have full control over your auctions when you set them up. It could have been avoided if you set it up differently to safeguard yourself from it happening.

Your blame is misplaced. There are no secrets about how our platform currently works. All of the limitations and benefits are clear. It's easy for sellers to safeguard themselves if they choose to or they can take on a little more risk if they want the potential upside of that risk (more bidders).

The power of choice is in your hands. Use it wisely, because your decisions may affect the outcome.