On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 17:30:21 +0000, Bruce wrote:

On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 10:51:10 -0600, Jules
wrote:

On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 14:38:20 +0000, Bruce wrote:
Instead of being primarily a means of avoiding low value but useful
items going to landfill, Freecycle has become a means of cynically
obtaining something valuable for nothing.

The problem I find is that some mods try and police it by deciding what's
valuable and what isn't, then making blanket bans on some subjects (no
computers, no vehicles etc.) which has the downside of sending legitimate
stuff to the dump.


Well, there's always the charity shop - but not for vehicles.

I don't think many of them do electronics these days either, do they? Too
much time to find someone to PAT test them and make sure they work, and
then it takes up shelf space...

I'm starting to think that a list that limits things to a max of 50
quid/dollars/whatever per item might be the best way - low enough that
unwanted things that might be seen as "worth something" are nearly
free, but high enough that it might stop the same pikey twunts from
grabbing everything they can get their hands on.

But what value do you put on, for example, a posh dishwasher that is
five years old, was £500 when new but needs a new pump? More or less
than £50? I feel sorry for the moderators!

Well, I saw it as the seller's job to put a value on it - not
that being a moderator's job. I just think the 100 of "local currency" is
perhaps a bit high if the aim is to keep stuff out of landfill - but
selling for a lesser amount (i.e. the 50 limit) might be enough to stop
the pikeys from getting too heavily involved. I suppose they might still
know their markets though and know what they can flog stuff for.

re. collection issues, the norm on my local list is for people to leave
offered items outside or in a porch, shed etc. for collection.

I do find the ones who wash their hands of it and just post saying "left
everything on the driveway - first come, first served. If it's not gone by
tonight it's going to the dump" somewhat irritating though - I can't be
bothered doing a 40 mile round-trip on the offchance the thing that caught
my eye is still there, but at the same time it's frustrating to think that
something I could have used might be off to the crusher because nobody
else wanted it...

re. posting stats - good idea. The Cambridge one used to try to encourage
folk to balance their wanted / acceptance posts with ones actually
offering something, and to a certain extent this was policed by the
moderators, but maybe they no longer do that.

cheers

Jules

Andrew Gabriel wrote:

I tried to join the Farnborough one a couple of times, when I had
things to get rid of which I thought someone might want.
On neither occasion did my subscription email ever get replied to,
and the stuff eventually went to the tip.
For all I know, that group may be dead anyway.


Surrey Heath one runs well enough.

Andy

On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 17:30:21 +0000 Bruce wrote :
It is sad to have to moderate a Freecycle group, but I have seen one
group local to me descend into anarchy. When it first started it was
well ordered and polite, but then the grasping chavs arrived and that
was the end of it.

It is now 100% moderated and works OK, but it's a lot of work for the
moderators.

The Twickenham one was moderated, but after a while you got given white
card status and your posts went straight through.

Prior to emigrating I gave away lots of stuff that was worth money: just
needed to get rid of it without the complications of eBay or car boot
sale. One DIYer went away with masses of hardware, part box screws,
tools etc which hadn't sold at the boot sale.

--
Tony Bryer, Greentram: 'Software to build on' Melbourne, Australia
www.superbeam.co.uk www.superbeam.com www.greentram.com

On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 17:30:21 +0000, Bruce
wrote:

On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 10:51:10 -0600, Jules
wrote:

On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 14:38:20 +0000, Bruce wrote:
Instead of being primarily a means of avoiding low value but useful
items going to landfill, Freecycle has become a means of cynically
obtaining something valuable for nothing.

The problem I find is that some mods try and police it by deciding what's
valuable and what isn't, then making blanket bans on some subjects (no
computers, no vehicles etc.) which has the downside of sending legitimate
stuff to the dump.

Well, there's always the charity shop - but not for vehicles.

I find charity shops will take very little nowadays. Gone are the
days where the you can buy and old scarf for 10p, served by a couple
of old ladies. Nowadays charity shops have gone upmarket and sell
stuff for a lot more money. None of my stuff is good enough for them
;-)

It is sad to have to moderate a Freecycle group, but I have seen one
group local to me descend into anarchy. When it first started it was
well ordered and polite, but then the grasping chavs arrived and that
was the end of it.

It is now 100% moderated and works OK, but it's a lot of work for the
moderators.

Ours are moderated. However they seem to be able to stop me posting
more than two "wanted" emails in a month and trim my subject lines,
but are somehow unable to stop blatant spam getting on the list.

I'm starting to think that a list that limits things to a max of 50
quid/dollars/whatever per item might be the best way - low enough that
unwanted things that might be seen as "worth something" are nearly
free, but high enough that it might stop the same pikey twunts from
grabbing everything they can get their hands on.

But what value do you put on, for example, a posh dishwasher that is
five years old, was £500 when new but needs a new pump? More or less
than £50? I feel sorry for the moderators!

The whole point of freecycle is the stuff is free. It would be
unrealistic to have a rule such as this.

I think email (and certainly yahoo) is the wrong way of running
freecycle. We need a dedicated system where items are automatically
removed when taken, to save many wasted "Have you still got it?"
emails. No-shows need to be flagged next to the users' names and a
primitive feedback system would help.

With the wealth of PD software around I'm sure someone could implement
a system like this for very little cost.

--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) Due to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
(")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking most articles
posted from there. If you wish your postings to be seen by
everyone you will need use a different method of posting.
[Reply-to address valid until it is spammed.]

On Mon, 2 Nov 2009 14:50:51 -0000, "mark"
wrote:


"Mark" wrote in message
.. .
On 30 Oct 2009 10:53:05 +0000 (GMT), Theo Markettos
wrote:

Tim W wrote:
I have 2 exim forward rules for those:

I have similar (it's procmail not exim, but same difference). They're
split
into three streams which go to three local newsgroups: freecycle.offered,
freecycle.taken and freecycle.wanted. There's about 14000 messages in the
4-month expiry. Then I just read them with the rest of my newsfeed.

I also have a rule to pull out articles of interest and email them to me
so,
when a friend needed a dishwasher, I had it email everything with the word
'dishwasher' it in.

How many freecyclers can actually spell "dishwasher"?


Freecycle went down hill when all the professional wanters and other beggars
started treating it as some sort of cosmic ordering service or a freebie
version of the Argos catalogue.
What ****es me off is the cheeky *******s who want something for nothing and
it isn't even for themselves, as in this case. What does it matter if
someone can't spell dishwasher.

because your filter, you described above, would not work if you search
for dishwasher and it is spelled incorrectly.

--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) Due to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
(")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking most articles
posted from there. If you wish your postings to be seen by
everyone you will need use a different method of posting.
[Reply-to address valid until it is spammed.]

Bruce wrote:

That sounds like "making it as complicated as eBay, but for free". I
agree that some kind of feedback would improve Freecycle, but all I
would need is a list of people who have been no-shows, perhaps more
than twice.

I wasn't thinking of anything as complicated as a feedback system. If
the Yahoo! search system was working as it should (and it is not) then a
simple search by username should give you a list of items that a person
has OFFERED / TAKEN / WANTED and that is at least a start to making an
assessment as to who is genuine and who might not be.

If the system was extended to require requests to be logged as well then
you would in addition be able to favour someone who has been trying to
get hold of something for a while or alternatively disfavour someone who
request anything of possible value.

A web interface might make it easier but it could be done within the
existing Yahoo! framework if they could get their act together and make
their search work.

Andrew

Mark wrote:


Ours are moderated. However they seem to be able to stop me posting
more than two "wanted" emails in a month and trim my subject lines,
but are somehow unable to stop blatant spam getting on the list.

The latter seems inexcusable in a fully moderated group, the former is just
a bit stupid. I gave up limiting "wanted" messages as the only people it
worked on were those who weren't savvy enough to register more than one
email address.

Tim

Andy Champ wrote:
Andrew Gabriel wrote:

I tried to join the Farnborough one a couple of times, when I had
things to get rid of which I thought someone might want.
On neither occasion did my subscription email ever get replied to,
and the stuff eventually went to the tip.
For all I know, that group may be dead anyway.


Surrey Heath one runs well enough.

Andy

EBay works well for local low value items. I wouldn't faff about with
Freecycle.

On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 10:05:43 +0000, Andrew May
wrote:

Bruce wrote:

That sounds like "making it as complicated as eBay, but for free". I
agree that some kind of feedback would improve Freecycle, but all I
would need is a list of people who have been no-shows, perhaps more
than twice.

I wasn't thinking of anything as complicated as a feedback system. If
the Yahoo! search system was working as it should (and it is not) then a
simple search by username should give you a list of items that a person
has OFFERED / TAKEN / WANTED and that is at least a start to making an
assessment as to who is genuine and who might not be.


OK, I see your point. But it would get to the stage where Freecycle
was hard work. I would prefer a blacklist or outright bans because
they are easier to operate.


If the system was extended to require requests to be logged as well then
you would in addition be able to favour someone who has been trying to
get hold of something for a while or alternatively disfavour someone who
request anything of possible value.

A web interface might make it easier but it could be done within the
existing Yahoo! framework if they could get their act together and make
their search work.


Yes, but would people use it?

I must admit keeping my own lists of reliable/unreliable Freecycle
members so I know who to choose/avoid. I recently gave away three
separate items to the same person because he replied with a phone
number, turned up when he said and was very polite. If he replies to
any other of my Freecycle ads he will always be first choice, even if
other people reply first - or have more emotional sob stories. ;-)

We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember Bolted
saying something like:

On 30 Oct, 12:42, (Steve Firth) wrote:

I'd rather throw my crap into a wastebin.

That's a strange habit.

Saniflo!

Bruce wrote:
On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 10:05:43 +0000, Andrew May
wrote:

Bruce wrote:

That sounds like "making it as complicated as eBay, but for free".
I agree that some kind of feedback would improve Freecycle, but all
I would need is a list of people who have been no-shows, perhaps
more than twice.

I wasn't thinking of anything as complicated as a feedback system. If
the Yahoo! search system was working as it should (and it is not)
then a simple search by username should give you a list of items
that a person has OFFERED / TAKEN / WANTED and that is at least a
start to making an assessment as to who is genuine and who might not
be.


OK, I see your point. But it would get to the stage where Freecycle
was hard work. I would prefer a blacklist or outright bans because
they are easier to operate.

Are they b*ggery! Blacklists and bans are completely useless as all it
needs is for the offender to sign up with a new email address. If you don't
ban people then they don't morph and members soon get to know who to avoid.

I must admit keeping my own lists of reliable/unreliable Freecycle
members so I know who to choose/avoid.

It's the only system that reliably works.

Tim

On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 13:38:31 -0000, "Tim"
wrote:

Bruce wrote:
On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 10:05:43 +0000, Andrew May
wrote:

Bruce wrote:

That sounds like "making it as complicated as eBay, but for free".
I agree that some kind of feedback would improve Freecycle, but all
I would need is a list of people who have been no-shows, perhaps
more than twice.

I wasn't thinking of anything as complicated as a feedback system. If
the Yahoo! search system was working as it should (and it is not)
then a simple search by username should give you a list of items
that a person has OFFERED / TAKEN / WANTED and that is at least a
start to making an assessment as to who is genuine and who might not
be.


OK, I see your point. But it would get to the stage where Freecycle
was hard work. I would prefer a blacklist or outright bans because
they are easier to operate.

Are they b*ggery! Blacklists and bans are completely useless as all it
needs is for the offender to sign up with a new email address. If you don't
ban people then they don't morph and members soon get to know who to avoid.


Good point. ;-)


I must admit keeping my own lists of reliable/unreliable Freecycle
members so I know who to choose/avoid.

It's the only system that reliably works.


Indeed.