Help Build Trust and Reliability of Deals posted on slickdeals.net

[rrfayette]

Contents

Overview & Purpose below
...Case Studies over at post #14
...Resolutions & Alternative Ending over at post #15

OVERVIEW

Experience and replies by other users, such as those over at the Case Studies, made me realize one of the prime obstruction in locating good deals-- lack of reliability, credibility, and trust of deals posted.

I use slickdeals.net, and as a registered member and user, I feel obligated to raise important concerns such as this to the SlickDeals community. One user's comment is perfectly accurate in his or her usage of the phrase "poorly researched deals." Many posts I have witnessed are precisely that, and from my experience here, I have seen similar concerns.

I have seen vigilant and diligent users post details of a specific product, helpful negative experiences they had, and other useful and crucial information. These type of information is a prerequisite to increase the assurance that a deal has merit. The opinion of user dst1: "I think most of the bad deals come from posters who simply don't take the time to read the details of what it is they are posting. The point of SD is people helping other people, not harming them. If SD simply makes people waste time, why come."

Slickdeals has to differentiate itself by establishing a solid basis for trust of deals that are posted on the slickdeals forums. I know if I were to post a deal, I'd make certain that it was indeed a deal, not junk forged by F rated companies, and we need to be persistent in removing those threads quickly.

PURPOSE

The main purpose of this thread is to brainstorm solutions to this pressing issue: Building trust and reliability of deals posted on slickdeals.net. This thread is not solely about rebates nor protecting new and experienced users.

Please suggest improvements to current resolutions or suggest any new resolutions. All that is not spam and productive is welcome. Thank you.

[random.]

I would say that most people posting something with a rebate, read it. If not and you're too lazy to read it yourself, then that's your problem. No one made you buy it. Also, if you wait maximum 20 posts, someone will mention that the rebate is not correct.

There is no reason for someone to have to look up a product review. Maybe someone wants that specific product, regardless of it's rating, who are we to decide?

As for the BBB thing- When it's a bad company, trust me, people will mention it... over and over. Some people are willing to take the risk.

Just because 5 people thumbed down a deal does not mean it doesn't belong on the front page. Sometimes people thumbs down them because they have no use for it personally, they don't like the OP, or for a whole bunch of other reasons. If most people think it's a good deal, and mostly Mr. SD and Redsolar, it will go on the front page.


Btw- I like how well writen this was compared to your other posts in site issues and suggestions. :thumbsup:

[rrfayette]

I don't know how to respond. I've expressed everything I needed to above.

[random.]

No need for response, although I was kind of looking forward to seeing what you had to say.

[freebiefan21]

I agree with what you said, but isn't a deal on the first page because of the latest response? I thought those with the newest response would be at the top of the list. I think the most valuable way to get rid of a bad deal (If everyone in the thread seems to think so) is either to mod alert it or just let it go, most people aren't gonna go searching 7 pages back if there are tons of good/new deals on the first 2-3 pages, bumping a bad deal just draws more attention to it, I would think.....

[bean]

its at your own discretion, quit whining.

[StarNova]

its at your own discretion, quit whining.

I have to agree with bean. It is your responsiblity to research and confirm a deal BEFORE you purchase. You must read the whole thread and the store's info first.

I think it is in Slickdeals best interest to help avoid Phishing or other scams (I don't do much in the freebies section now 'cuz of that). It would hurt the bottomline.

Mr. SD does have mods who (I assume) check on deals before they are placed on the front page. But this is an open and public forum, any old yah-hoo could put any link in a forum.

I do agree with the OP that awful companies like known (or highly suspected) phishing sites should have their URLs blocked. That is a good idea.

[rrfayette]

If I started a thread, of course, "it is your responsiblity to research and confirm a deal BEFORE you purchase," and it is also my responsiblity to research the deal just the same, as the underlying principle behind #4 has alluded to. I always read the threads I'm interested in, but not everyone does.

"I think it is in Slickdeals best interest to help avoid Phishing or other scams (I don't do much in the freebies section now 'cuz of that). It would hurt the bottomline."

I don't know how to reply to this; are we trying make slickdeals.net better for all of us, or are we trying to..

"This is an open and public forum, any old yah-hoo could put any link in a forum," and this thread is also to brainstorm ideas on how to make it more safe for the users, which was already alluded to above.

[dst1]

I think most of the bad deals come from posters who simply don't take the time to read the details of what it is they are posting. One of the things I would like to see done away with is the whole reputation thing. It's pointless. People chase points instead of good deals. Instead, I would like to see a ban on inserting deals unless one has ben a registered member of SD for 90 days. I think this would help cut down on the problem.

I do agree with the idea that buyers are responsible for looking into the details of any deal before purchasing. Having said that, one could spend one's whole life doing that. The point of SD is people helping other people, not harming them. If SD simply makes people waste time, why come.

[dontbanme]

I think most of the bad deals come from posters who simply don't take the time to read the details of what it is they are posting. One of the things I would like to see done away with is the whole reputation thing. It's pointless. People chase points instead of good deals. Instead, I would like to see a ban on inserting deals unless one has ben a registered member of SD for 90 days. I think this would help cut down on the problem.

I do agree with the idea that buyers are responsible for looking into the details of any deal before purchasing. Having said that, one could spend one's whole life doing that. The point of SD is people helping other people, not harming them. If SD simply makes people waste time, why come.

I agree with the rep thing. People sometimes post deals like crazy to get reps (unless they do it to help others). I would believe simple thank you or a thumbs up should be as encouraging. One morning I opened SD and found around 15 consecutive posts by a poster.

My last avatar was banned because I posted my bad experience from one of the FP products posted by same famous poster and the OP had a fight with me over threadcrapping (I guess these people also hate consumers who post their negative experience on Amazon and only read positive comments to make their buying decisions). I had posted some FP deals with that, but took time to make sure I had read every word of it before posting. Surely accept my responibility for buying product from a crap company without researching, if only because I was working 15 hour days and thought would buy something which I needed for cheap from a really good deal. It's a lesson for the future.

[landingike]

I like the idea of posting a link to a review so we know if the product is worth the effort. Also the idea of alerting people to which company is providing the rebate and their reputation so people can avoid the bad businesses.

Ultimately it is the end users responsibility to read the entire rebate and do their own research on the product. It would just help people to have those highlighted in the original post.

[robble]

This makes me think abou tpeople posting deals with shady companies.

Specifically RITZCAMERA.COM

While a few people have managed to ge ta elgit deal through ritz many more have been ripped off by ritz than had a legit purchasing experience. ritz has a horrible resellerratings score and the BBB says to avoid ritz. I am currently out $159 from them and my refund isn't in sight. Several other people on this board have been burned by them, yet I still see people (extreme high 10k+ rep point people) posting deals from Ritz. There are probably other comapanies that are just as bad that get exposure on here. the ritz website should be completely blocked on slickdeals - and any other company that consistantly rips people off.

I haven't seen any mods post in this thread. Any out there reading it? It'd be nice for Mr. SD himself to read it.

[random.]

I can guarentee you that Mr. SD and at least one or two mods have read this thread... I know that 'cause they respond alot in this forum.

I think it's up to the buyer to verify who they are buying from.

I do agree with the fact though that if they have a real shitty reseller rating and that they have a bad standing with the BBB that they should become another urlhasbeenblocked.

[rrfayette]

CASE STUDIES

1) http://forums.slickdeals.net/showthread.php?t=400819
starting on post #98; page 7-8
2) http://forums.slickdeals.net/showthread.php?t=393463
Page 2-7
3) http://forums.slickdeals.net/showthread.php?t=401832&page=3
Informative posts spread out sporadically from page 3-9

Feel free to PM me more as you find more examples. Will update from time to time.

[rrfayette]

RESOLUTIONS:

Feel free to suggest more bright ideas. Will update and organize as necessary.

--
1) Quality over quantity: OP should be responsible enough to check and link to reliable reviews (not buy.com's) of the product in question prior to posting it. This provides a feeling of quality assurance. (by rrfayette)

"I like the idea of posting a link to a review so we know if the product is worth the effort." (landingike)

--
2) Unreliable companies that have atrocious rating by the Better Business Bureau, such as ACP-EP, should not be linked to as they cause an aura of distrust. (by rrfayette)

Alternative: If certain users are foolish enough to deal with bad businesses, by all means let them, but let this not do harm to the other users who are not irrational. At the very least, new users of slickdeals should be notify of any bad businesses by the OP. (by rrfayette)

--
3) Posts with more than 5 negative ratings should not have the privilege to be on the front page of slickdeals, and if it is, it should be removed. I believe ~5 negatives are adequate to help prevent bad deals; almost all on the current home page does not have more than 5 negative ratings. This is merely a precaution. (by rrfayette)

Alternative: Simply "mod alert the thread or just let it go, most people aren't gonna go searching 7 pages back if there are tons of good/new deals on the first 2-3 pages, bumping a bad deal just draws more attention to it, I would think....." (by freebiefan21)

Comment: Ratings are an imperfect science. "Just because 5 people thumbed down a deal does not mean it doesn't belong on the front page. Sometimes people thumbs down them because they have no use for it personally, they don't like the OP, or for a whole bunch of other reasons. (by Melissa2)

--
4) If a deal, or related aspect of a deal, such as a rebate, is incorrect, it would be helpful to everyone for the OP to initially check for it's accuracy. So if I started a thread, I should take responsibility for my actions, by simply deleting the thread. (by rrfayette)

In Addition: "Ultimately it is the end users responsibility to read the entire rebate and do their own research on the product. It would just help people to have those highlighted in the original post." (landingike)

Alternative: Wait maximum 20 posts. "No one made you buy it. Also, if you wait maximum 20 posts, someone will mention that the rebate is not correct." (by Melissa2) (rrfayette's bold)

--
5) "Avoid Phishing or other scams," especially on the freebie forum. "Companies like known (or highly suspected) phishing sites should have their URLs blocked." (by StarNova)

--
6) Removal of the repping system: "One of the things I would like to see done away with is the whole reputation thing. It's pointless. People chase points instead of good deals." (by dst1)

--
7) Implement "a ban on inserting deals unless one has been a registered member of SD for 90 days. I think this would help cut down on the problem." (by dst1)

--

ALTERNATIVE ENDING

Or

We can do nothing, if thats what the consensus prefers. (by those that don't give a d*mn)

Notice: If you feel I have misrepresented your views in any way, shape or form, please PM me. I don't believe I have; it's just in case.

***End

[XXnarg]

Deal hunting involves taking risks and exercising judgment.

If you want a 100% guarantee of satisfaction and safety, then pay list price at Nordstrom or some other store like that. Don't bother hunting for bargains.

It's pretty hard to enforce quality control on a forum comprised of posts by unscreened, casual volunteers.

[rrfayette]

Note: Comments like the above kills progress. Please only post if you have suggestions for improving deals.

All of us know that "deal hunting involves exercising judgment," otherwise, we would all be purchasing IPod nanos for $1,000 each. I certainty hope you have better judgment then that.

If you want a 100% guarantee of satisfaction and safety, then pay list price at Nordstrom or some other store like that. Don't bother hunting for bargains.

By saying "If you want a 100% guarantee," you only demonstrate your inability to read and assume accurately. Which resolution proposes "a 100% guarantee of satisfaction and safety"?

The resolutions are ideas from everyone, not just me.

It's pretty hard to enforce quality control on a forum comprised of posts by unscreened, casual volunteers.

Yes it's difficult. One important part of this brainstorming process is to think up solutions to increase the "satisfaction [and/or] safety" of deals for the users here. If you are not here to contribute, then take your pitiful apathy somewhere else.

Note: Again, please only post if you have suggestions for improving deals. Spam, and fighting words will likely be deleted, including my own.

[dontbanme]

Deal hunting involves taking risks and exercising judgment.

If you want a 100% guarantee of satisfaction and safety, then pay list price at Nordstrom or some other store like that. Don't bother hunting for bargains.

It's pretty hard to enforce quality control on a forum comprised of posts by unscreened, casual volunteers.

If the rep system did not promote people to publish 100s of deals a day, they probably would have some time to exercise judgement before posting a deal, methinks.

[XXnarg]

IMHO, I'd rather have plenty of deals posted here and sort out the good ones for myself than to have some unwieldy, impossible-to-enforce, non-quantifiable system placed on top of everything else.

More deals means...more deals.

Progress is...more deals.

[r1yan]

IMHO, I'd rather have plenty of deals posted here and sort out the good ones for myself than to have some unwieldy, impossible-to-enforce, non-quantifiable system placed on top of everything else.

More deals means...more deals.

Progress is...more deals.:iagree: