We have seen evidence of "long cons" here where an account is created and lays dormant for years. We have seen that posts are made that are for the most part seem legitimate and turn out to be "post increasing counts" to build trust.

I don't know that there is any 100% certain way to eliminate scammers.

Para has often said that part of the uniqueness of SIGforum is that to "get" it one must observe for awhile. There have been stickies with rules since the day I joined and yet they get ignored.

I am pointing out some of the obvious I know, but sometimes the obvious needs restated.

I thought my reasoning for the photos was clear, but perhaps it wasn't. From my perspective, it shows a level of commitment (even for the Glock mag), but it also shows an element of time that perhaps some scammers aren't willing to take. Yes, I know scammers have and will post photos.

Some of the solution should go back to the read the lay of the land concept. Let it be known but unwritten. Nuke what doesn't adhere and don't offer an explanation. That might seem harsh. I think Para has been more than generous and understanding.

quote:

Originally posted by ensigmatic:
I think the one firm rule para has already said will be adopted, all transaction participants must post to the thread at some point, is perhaps the best, most effective, so far. I don't see any way to enforce it, though.

Contact email in profile: I think that would be a good rule.

Only the profile email be used: There's no way for site admin to police/enforce this.

As far as no way to enforce it by the admins, that is actually the point of these proposed rules. As a forum member and user of the classified you put your big boy pants on and either follow the rules or not. If you don’t follow the rules, you get no help from the admins if the deal goes south because you chose not to deal with a verified member. You don’t get to post you got scammed and no extra work for the admins. If you choose to follow the rules, you have some confidence you are dealing with a valid forum member and the admins maybe able to help you using the information from the registration process or at least ban and publicly shame the bad actors, like Alec Baldwin.

quote:

Originally posted by BB61:
Coming from a buyer and not a seller...
With identity theft being what it is today, I feel the DL requirement for sellers is over the top.
Also, as long as its legal, who cares who ships it to your FFL?

Most FFLs require a copy of the DL if it is not coming from an FFL.

I also don’t think using ship my gun should be a requirement. There are a number of cheaper ways to do it for many folks.

A possible solution for verified members is to add an * (or some type of tag) to the beginning or end of their cut.

When a member has a transaction which goes well, you make a post in a dedicated feedback thread, then para adds the * (tag).

So if you see the tag, you know the member is GTG. Otherwise, proceed with caution, at your own risk.

Several good suggestions here already given.

Only visible to members when logged in

Email required in profile and communication only from profile email

Seller and buyer required to have a valid location in their profile and not something like “below the 72nd parallel”

Price required for all WTS posts

Must post who buyer is when sale agreed to

Couple of thoughts, for what they're worth.

1) Whatever the rules wind up becoming, I suggest that all ads be required to include a statement in the body that the poster has read and understood them. Boilerplate, if you like, along the lines of "This listing is being done in accord with The Rules.". That would put everyone on record.

2) I don't have a public email listed in the directory, and hope to avoid doing so going forward. If it winds up that is required to have a publicly available email address in the directory to participate, then I might put one into the directory in before I participate and then remove it after the transaction. Hopefully that would meet the requirement.

3) I don't understand the reluctance for 'want to sell' ads being required to have photos - photos are useful in helping sales, honestly trivial to take given we all walk around with cameras in our phones, and they are free to post at Postimage or the like. That said, it is not obvious to everyone how to post pictures onto SIGforum. Perhaps if this is to be a rule, the rulebook could have specific instructions and examples of how to post photos?

4) It doesn't make sense to restrict shipping carriers, IMO. Whatever the seller and buyer agree on that meets the applicable legalities should be OK.

post image is free and easy. i just posted an ad today and took pictures with the home page logo and my name with current date. Figured that was an easy way to prove the item exists.

The problem with posting photos is less than apparent. Many of you have never heard of Exif Data.

Here's the problem: Exif Data Privacy and Security Concerns

If you take pictures with your phone, location data is present (unless you turn off geo-locating) and can be extracted. Exif data can and should be stripped from any photos you post which have been taken in and near your home. If we were to poll the active members of this forum, how many of them would even be aware of the fact that their photos contain GPS data betraying the location these photos are taken, and of those who are aware of this, how many would know how to strip this data from their pics before posting them?

All of this is a bit much for some of our members, wouldn't you say?

1.Pay a annual fee maybe $50 or so for classified access. This could be for all members or you can grandfater all members with 3 years or more membership are exempt from yearly dues. After members under 3 years reach 3 year mark then they will be exempt from yearly dues.Or whatever time frame you think would be appropriate.
2.Have to be a member for 3 months or so before you can sign up for classified access.
3.Have a feedback or rating system for users.

For those that want, you can download an exif viewer on your phone. I was using a gps enabled camera for years for crash invests and would just pull the gps coordinates off the exif data.

I'll have to check my iphone to see if that can be turned off. I know it's on by default for most phones.

If I take a picture, then I screenshot it, the gps data is automatically removed from the screenshot.

ok, just checked, you can turn off geotagging on the iphone camera.
settings -> privacy -> location services -> camera

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
The problem with posting photos is less than apparent. Many of you have never heard of Exif Data.

Here's the problem: Exif Data Privacy and Security Concerns

If you take pictures with your phone, location data is present (unless you turn off geo-locating) and can be extracted. Exif data can and should be stripped from any photos you post which have been taken in and near your home. If we were to poll the active members of this forum, how many of them would even be aware of the fact that their photos contain GPS data betraying the location these photos are taken, and of those who are aware of this, how many would know how to strip this data from their pics before posting them?

All of this is a bit much for some of our members, wouldn't you say?

Para,

I always convert my photos to screenshots first. Does this solve the GPS issue?

quote:

Originally posted by Johnny 3eagles:
Shut it down for a couple of days/weeks in order to get new rules established.
3 Sub Forums: WTS. WTB. VENDORS. Specific rules for each.

WTS and WTB would be great if separated,

Well. I never heard of Exif Data, let alone that it has something to do with where I took a photo with my phone.

But, thanks to Chowser, I turned mine off in my iphone.

Wonder what other trackers are lurking in there?

Bob

quote:

Originally posted by Ronin1069:

I always convert my photos to screenshots first. Does this solve the GPS issue?

In the post immediately above yours, four minutes earlier, Chowser states that the location information is not propagated to a screenshot.

I agree with the public discussion in the thread for confirmation. That makes sense

quote:

Originally posted by Excam_Man:
A possible solution for verified members is to add an * (or some type of tag) to the beginning or end of their cut.

When a member has a transaction which goes well, you make a post in a dedicated feedback thread, then para adds the * (tag).

So if you see the tag, you know the member is GTG. Otherwise, proceed with caution, at your own risk.

We've had a recent scammer that accessed or hacked a long standing members ID here and used that to contact members.

I see alot of these suggestions as rules. Rules require enforcement. If there is a way to automate or provide technology to remove this burden, I think everyone would be happier.
All of these suggestions are with the caveat that everyone should do their own due diligence and recognize not every system is perfect. Someone could get hacked, just as easily as their email is hacked, etc.

1) After email is exchanged, try picking up the phone to talk. In my experience, this eliminates alot of issues.
2) Enable the PM System- that will eliminate the question of who is sending the message.
3) Enable the feedback system, if one is available.
4) Learn how to post pictures for "proof of life".
If someone does not know how, the buyer/seller should be able to figure out pretty quickly if the person is legit. OR exchange emails/texts with pictures and some sort of "proof of life" in the picture. This refers to a username/date combo of sorts.
5) Close the marketplace to public viewing.

quote:

Originally posted by 220-9er:

quote:

Originally posted by Excam_Man:
A possible solution for verified members is to add an * (or some type of tag) to the beginning or end of their cut.

When a member has a transaction which goes well, you make a post in a dedicated feedback thread, then para adds the * (tag).

So if you see the tag, you know the member is GTG. Otherwise, proceed with caution, at your own risk.

We've had a recent scammer that accessed or hacked a long standing members ID here and used that to contact members.

While true, if the member is verified *and* posts in the thread... it's better than nothing.

Change the color of the Posts according to #.
Less than 100--Red
100-200--Yellow
over 200--Green

Do the same for Registered date--3 mo's = red, 1year=yellow, > 1year ==green.

Member status--verified member vs new??

Just trying for visual cues to identify what everyone else has posted.

quote:

Originally posted by darthfuster:
I like the 200 post count threshold. I have experience with another forum which has a much lower standard and some folks will register and then mass post so they can sell their stuff. They call it sandbagging, not sure what the etymology of that term is though.

Seems to me a post count, be it 50, 100 or more to be allowed access to post in the classifieds would weed out quite a few scammers. It's pretty common in a lot of forums. TacomaWorld for example requires 50 posts along with some other restrictions. Any attempt to sell outside of the for sale sections is automatically deleted,(don't know if mods do this or there are trigger words) and no posts are allowed in the for sale section with less than 50 post count, be it posting an item for sale or responding to a posted item. Also to post in the for sale section, the poster must be in good standing. No moderated status etc. It actually takes quite a bit to generate 50 posts. If this could be configure without the need of a moderator to intervein, might clean that up.