Speedster Scam in classified?

[Mike Wilson]

Definitely some type of vetting process is needed.

Mikr

[Robert Thiemrodt]

Here's the most simplistic way to know if something is a scam, if it sounds to good to be true, it usually is. No, I didn't make that saying up. I learned it as a kid.

[Adam Wright]

I doubt if they would get over the urge to scam after a two-week cooling-off period.

If you put one more step in there it will probably work. You can't post in the classifieds until you have 10 posts to your credit. Pretty simple if you're a Porsche guy, pretty complicated if you're a scammer. This rule will also be two fold. If you want to be part of this community, you should participate in it, if you just want to use this community to sell things, well, that's not why we have a club.

[Martin Benade]

Posted yet again.

[Erik Thomas]

Perhaps it would be better if no classifieds until a member of the registry for a year? The ads are free, so it is not like we are losing revenue.

[Vic Skirmants]

Perhaps it would be better if no classifieds until a member of the registry for a year? The ads are free, so it is not like we are losing revenue.

At least not within minutes of them joining!

[George Walling]

I think a waiting period before posting a add is a good way to helping stop the scam postings. I also think posting information or help is a good way to control the problem maybe both way can help. Just my thoughts.

[Craig Richter]

Adam's method sounds really good. Scamsters are going to have a hard time faking any level of 356 interest or expertise 10 times. That's too much like work!

[Mike Wilson]

I like the idea of either 10 posts and/or a time frame before you can sell.

Mike

[Gordon Maltby]

Just playing the devil's advocate here, but my comment is based on experience. There are always people who join the club to legitimately sell a car or parts as their primary motivation. I don't think it's a good idea to discourage them; they may not want to post ten times or wait a month.

When a prospective member would call the membership office (usually to ask if a non-member can post an ad), we would always explain that the $45 spent on a membership was the cheapest, easiest, safest way to market a 356 or that set of Rudge wheels found in old Uncle Ed's garage rafters. They could always go to eBay and end up paying more in final fees, dealing with wackos and answering stupid questions, but on our site it was qualified, knowledgeable buyers ready and waiting. It was even possible to get some advice beforehand from members on 356Talk, then list a big-ticket item. A full-service marketplace.

Driving these people away by insisting that they become vetted over a period of time or by a number of posts is counterproductive in other ways. If they don't join, that car or those parts or memorabilia they have may never be available to Registry members. We'd be hurting ourselves with the kind of restrictions noted in this thread.

I think the situation that started this current discussion had to do with an unusually determined scammer. The fact that it was obvious to so many members and was acted on almost immediately by the monitors and membership shows that the danger is minimal to any member with a brain. Most of these bozos are one-and-done quickly after Greg, Mary and Curt give them the boot.

If indeed, there is a groundswell of interest in putting restrictions on new members ads, rather than continue a long discussion here, make a proposal to the trustees, who have a board meeting coming up in a few months. You can contact any of them at the addresses in the magazine, page 5.

[Roy Smalley]

Well said Gordon. The Registry, in my opinion, has more than enough rules that are not only difficult to interpret for use, but difficult to monitor consistently. One of my friend's ad was threatened (for lack of a better word) for using the word "rare" in describing the part, yet 'rare' is commonly used as is "NOS" which quite often, is absolutely wrong when applied to current production in current packaging. But I will add as a defense, most don't have a reason to know what NOS really means, and that includes the widespread use of "original" when describing parts.

There are many inconsistencies in enforcement and not fair to either the users or the monitor.

Rules need to clear and objective, not open to a variety of interpretations and we can't protect all 'those with a brain" as you put it...... and the fewer the better.

[Mike Wilson]

Thanks for presenting a different perspective on the issue.

Mike

[Martin Bruechle]

Scam Alert; https://inlandempire.craigslist.org/cto ... 64173.html

[Jeffrey Leeds]

If indeed, there is a groundswell of interest in putting restrictions on new members ads, rather than continue a long discussion here, make a proposal to the trustees, who have a board meeting coming up in a few months. You can contact any of them at the addresses in the magazine, page 5.

Good suggestion Gordon; I did it yesterday.

Jeff

[George Walling]

I don't like the idea of more rules either so I will leave it up to the folks who use the forsale want adds and board members determine what is best to control and solve the problem. I normally don't sell my extra parts I usually trade for some thing I may need or to help a member out.
George