So now that Beer Trading threadshitting is back in full-effect ...

Noobs aside, yesterday I replied (thread$h@t) on a FT post from someone on the site for 3+years involving rare for dirty horse +. I didn't see how it all turned out, but things started getting ugly fast and needless to say I got a hearty slap on the wrist for opening my drunk mouth to what I thought was a troll post. I suppose the OP was serious since it resulted in deletion and punishment (ie got reported...if it doesn't get reported then it doesn't get modded right?)

So who is to say what is pointless? Who is to say what is fair? This kind of stuff gets into the territory that concerns me...especially if the mods are active traders. You trade wi a mod, crush them with a box and suddenly get some leniency in grey areas and inner circles start including mods. One thing for mods to respond to flagged posts, different story for them to start judging what posts are pointless. Mow many posts will get deleted as pointless after DL day or any other release? This can definitely prevent hyping of some new releases, but do we need someone to do this or can we let the trading market dictate what deserves hype beyond $4$/brewery or limited 4 brewery/limited? What about over $ in locals 4 limited? Will the mod get to decide how much over $4$ is valid vs pointless?

These are the scenarios that make me think that post only is the way to go. No headaches, no grey area, just letting ppl trade thier beer. I really don't see why that model isn't reinstated. To me that was the golden age of trading in recent memory. You want to trade beer, then dig through the forum and find a deal close to reasonable from your perspective and converse. People were way more reasonable since it was harder to get replies to your posts and all the trades I made at that time were fair and worked out without all the BS of the peanut gallery. Made some great trade partners during that time and sent out and received some of my best boxes.

In my opinion if ppl aren't willing to go beyond page 1, then they don't really want to trade. You can mark the forum as read when you read through it to ensure you have seen what is new since your last visit. At most there are 3 or 4 pages per day. Also you can always post an ISO if you don't want to look

 

Well that's off the table. At this point arguing for it is completely pointless.

 

Do you mean in negotiation or in their ISOs?

 

Negotiation. The isos were outlandish. I found if someone was trading something I wanted and I took a look at their wants and Bmed them we would make it work. My trade volume at that time was crazy, probably because I was one of the few who figured it out, but if someone posted a beer for trade and were looking for something unreasonable, they got no replies. I replied and suggested working something out and 7/10 times I worked something out. With post only and the state of the isos that was the only way to trade, everyone asked for the moon because that is what everyone asked for, so when you wrote them you were one of 2 or 3 bites so why not talk it out, worst case, nothing ges traded, sometimes the trades had nothing to do with the Iso at all.

Sort of like Craigslist where someone posts something you want and you negotiate. If you ever used Craigslist you'd know only ridiculously cheap stuff goes for the listing price, and is gone within minutes. It isn't that hard. This is how the world works. Ever buy a house? If so, look at it that way, there are comps, but they don't always mean much. It is about finding someone interested in what you have and then working out a deal.

 

I kind of look at it this way - anyone with Rare or Dirty Horse more or less knows what the hell they're doing, so there's no reason to get involved. To me it's really all about education - it's obvious when somebody doesn't know what they're doing. They joined the site 3 days ago, and their first post is something like "FT: DFH 120 ISO: Kate the Great".

Post only was no golden age. In fact, that's precisely when shit started to go downhill fast. See my threadshitting thread for the hypothetical reasons behind that.

 

Shame that post was deleted, the OP said that since they were offering up their precious rare, they expected 2 or more from a List that included dirty horse, blabber, ddg (I believe) and others of similar stature. This person was on the site for 3+ years taboot. Anyone with dirty horse probably knows what they are doing but any schmoe could get Rare...heck i've even got a small handful of them still. Having beer just means you have beer. Apparently being on the site for 3 years means you were on the site for 3 years, not necessarily that you ever ventured into trading or care about perceived values.

Also, in your scenario is it appropriate to ask how many 120s? Some would say yes, others would say no.

 

That's why I say post facts and let the traders interested interpret what they want from it. Opinions should be sent by private conversations. If the noobs trade doesn't get done then it should be obvious why to them by looking at the facts posted if its a lopsided trade.

 

I think the thread shitting gives the trade forum character if you ask me. Mods are risky because you run the risk of producing power tripping, biased assholes. If you don't want the comments, don't allow people to comment.

 

After reading this thread, I just have a couple observations.

1. In some respects, moderation is like being a politician in a micro-society. Those who desire power are exactly the people who shouldn't have it. Much like most of our politicians! For that reason (and those mentioned by other posters) identifying mods will be difficult.

2. No matter how you design a system, smart (and possibly not so smart) people will find a way to game it. There is no perfect solution, only various degrees of "good enough".

I'm not touching the first point, but for HOW to handle moderation, I think the option of publicly flagging a post as under moderation is a good start. Removal should the require approval of at least two mods plus final acceptance by Jason or Todd. A little public humiliation with swift penalties for repeat offenders *might* be a sufficient deterrent, particularly if penalties (timeout, permanent ban) are clearly spelled out.

 

Well jeepers that FT you reference was great, wasn't it? Didn't you just get through saying that a post like that was just a perfect opening for someone to make a private offer of something more reasonable?

Seriously, though, with post only there are some who would have seen that and instantly thought their Rare was on a Blabaer or DH level. Multiply that by the entire forum, and you see what has led us to today. Do you get it now? Post only wasn't the solution, it was the problem. It wasn't the road around the cliff, it was the shortcut to the cliff. You say you did well under that system. Maybe you did. I didn't. Most others didn't. And the community as a whole is left with the stock market mentality of the trading community as a result of it, with even more profit searchers in the community, and semi-relatedly, with even more mules on line at releases, even more impossibility of getting small batch beers at store, and threads like the ones we now see asking how to fix it. There never was a way to make trading perfect, but post only certainly is the way over the cliff for BA's trading community.

 

I agree wholeheartedly with what you're saying. Things got WAY worse when it went post only. I think the bros realized it and that's why they wanna make the replies in the trading forum work by finding a good option to curb unnecessary threadshitting.

 

Keep fighting the good fight. I'd rather see noobs posting for beers they've heard about and are interested in than a bunch of people telling them that Stone IRS can't land anything. People have taken 'trading value' way too far on this site. Moderation should be focused on threadshitting, not on deleting a perfectly acceptable trade thread.

 

I think the only time it would be acceptable for a mod to jump in about "trade value" would be if someone bumps their thread asking why it's not getting done. Then a mod could jump in and say "well, the Founders Porter you're trying to trade is available year-round, off the shelf, in a lot of different markets, so most people who have BCBS are probably looking for something a bit more limited, like KBS". That seems perfectly acceptable to me, and you're helping out not only the OP but also anyone new who stumbles across the thread. The mod should never say something like "this will never get done", as that doesn't really help anyone.

I don't think anyone here is suggesting that mods should be actively jumping in and trying to dictate trade value. Rather, deal with people who can't help themselves (read: behave), and be helpful when questions arise. I'd see it more as an easier way to make sure a thread doesn't get out of hand, as the Bros. obviously aren't always watching the forums.

 

I think they should be actively moderating the people trying to dictate trade value.

 

I agree, but it can sometimes be difficult to determine when someone is trying to influence the "value" or when someone is just trying to be (albeit, unsolicited) helpful.

 

This is also hard to do because everyone values everything differently. Other than the obvious white whales, everything else isnt as black and white.. Someone who has never had to chance to try KBS might value it much higher than someone who is sitting on a case+ of it at home.

 

Which is exactly why people need to keep their (unsolicited) opinions to themselves (or to BM).

 

Exactly

 

I was using the IRS post as an example, not because I didn't think it couldn't get done, but because the last time I looked (last night) it was up to 15 posts repeating the same point that the trade wasn't going to get done, and that was after at least 4 or 5 snarky comments that were deleted. This is why I think having specialized moderators to intervene helps the community. It's not about dictating trade value, but about having a trusted voice.

I agree with cbeer88 - laissez faire is great in theory - but we've seen that it hasn't worked. I think there's a good middle ground between libertarian and authoritarian by way of user education. Teach a man to fish and all that.

 

true, but I don't think the responses in that thread were about "trade value". It was more of a "here let me give you some tips, especially about availability/distribution/Venn diagram"

100% agree, I don't think anyone is really arguing differently.