<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<user>
  <id type="integer">10174</id>
  <url>http://uservoice.com/users/10174-babyboy808</url>
  <avatar_url>http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/380f0a3e0c931920d833fd3a5d5f1a94?default=http://uservoice.com/images/icons/default-avatar.jpg</avatar_url>
  <display_name>babyboy808</display_name>
  <name deprecated="true">babyboy808</name>
  <username deprecated="true">babyboy808</username>
  <activity_score type="integer">44</activity_score>
  <idea_score type="integer">239</idea_score>
  <supported_suggestions type="array" deprecated="false">
<suggestion>
  <id type="integer">7326</id>
  <url>http://marketplace.uservoice.com/pages/781-general/suggestions/7326-verification-of-adsense-income</url>
  <title>Verification of AdSense income</title>
  <abstract>Many sites are sold based on Google AdSense income; however, it is difficult for buyers to verify claims made by sellers about the amount of income being generated through

The Marketplace...</abstract>
  <text>Many sites are sold based on Google AdSense income; however, it is difficult for buyers to verify claims made by sellers about the amount of income being generated through AdSense.

The Marketplace system should (with seller&#8217;s permission) reach into the seller&#8217;s AdSense account and pull out income information.</text>
  <closed_at nil="true"></closed_at>
  <vote_count type="integer">86</vote_count>
  <comments_count type="integer">4</comments_count>
  <status>under review</status>
  <forum>
    <id type="integer">781</id>
    <name>General</name>
    <key deprecated="true">general</key>
  </forum>
  <response>
    <text>As a few users have pointed out, automated verification of income may not be possible. We may instead provide a &#8220;SitePoint-verified income&#8221; upgrade that the seller could pay for, after which a SitePoint staff member would contact the seller and work to verify the stated income.

Let us know what you think!</text>
    <abstract>As a few users have pointed out, automated verification of income may not be possible. We may instead provide a &#8220;SitePoint-verified income&#8221;...</abstract>
    <user>
      <id type="integer">7689</id>
      <name>Kevin Yank</name>
      <display_name>Kevin Yank</display_name>
    </user>
  </response>
  <created_by>
    <supporter>
      <user>
        <id type="integer">7689</id>
        <display_name>Kevin Yank</display_name>
        <name deprecated="true">Kevin Yank</name>
        <username deprecated="true">Kevin Yank</username>
      </user>
    </supporter>
  </created_by>
  <created_at type="datetime">2008-06-11T03:35:36Z</created_at>
  <updated_at type="datetime">2009-03-26T20:11:47Z</updated_at>
  <page deprecated="true">
    <key>general</key>
  </page>
</suggestion>
<suggestion>
  <id type="integer">6145</id>
  <url>http://marketplace.uservoice.com/pages/781-general/suggestions/6145-integrate-an-escrow-service</url>
  <title>Integrate an escrow service</title>
  <abstract>I suggest that Sitepoint integrate an escrow service into the marketplace. Something like the way rentacoder has. For a Buyer, they would have to deposit funds before they could bid on any item. This...</abstract>
  <text>I suggest that Sitepoint integrate an escrow service into the marketplace. Something like the way rentacoder has. For a Buyer, they would have to deposit funds before they could bid on any item. This requires alot of think, but it's just an idea that I think should be considered. </text>
  <closed_at nil="true"></closed_at>
  <vote_count type="integer">281</vote_count>
  <comments_count type="integer">6</comments_count>
  <status>planned</status>
  <forum>
    <id type="integer">781</id>
    <name>General</name>
    <key deprecated="true">general</key>
  </forum>
  <response nil="true"></response>
  <created_by>
    <supporter>
      <user>
        <id type="integer">10174</id>
        <display_name>babyboy808</display_name>
        <name deprecated="true">babyboy808</name>
        <username deprecated="true">babyboy808</username>
      </user>
    </supporter>
  </created_by>
  <created_at type="datetime">2008-05-29T23:28:17Z</created_at>
  <updated_at type="datetime">2009-03-26T20:11:15Z</updated_at>
  <page deprecated="true">
    <key>general</key>
  </page>
</suggestion>
<suggestion>
  <id type="integer">5462</id>
  <url>http://marketplace.uservoice.com/pages/781-general/suggestions/5462-don-t-allow-owner-to-delete-member-comments-</url>
  <title>Don't allow owner to delete member comments </title>
  <abstract>Don't allow auction owner to delete member comments in his auctions. It should at least apply to certain auctions like domain sellings where experienced members are warning about fake domain PR's of...</abstract>
  <text>Don't allow auction owner to delete member comments in his auctions. It should at least apply to certain auctions like domain sellings where experienced members are warning about fake domain PR's of fradulant sellers. Even if you allow them to delete the comment, at least people should see owner deleted XX comments in that auction.</text>
  <closed_at nil="true"></closed_at>
  <vote_count type="integer">1154</vote_count>
  <comments_count type="integer">17</comments_count>
  <status nil="true"></status>
  <forum>
    <id type="integer">781</id>
    <name>General</name>
    <key deprecated="true">general</key>
  </forum>
  <response>
    <text>We&#8217;ve been discussing this at length here. Right now, comments as an anti-fraud measure always lead us to a no-win situation. If we take the side of the commenters, we see abuse of the commenting system. If we take the side of the sellers, we see abuse of the comment deletion system.

Our approach in the short term will be to enhance the Marketplace with additional anti-fraud features that enable buyers to better gauge the legitimacy of listings (e.g. domain name ownership validation, site traffic verification, etc.).

As we do this, we will continually re-evaluate our policies on comment moderation. If it becomes practical and sensible to remove the 'delete comment' feature for sellers, we will.

Keep those votes and comments coming so we know your opinions on the subject!</text>
    <abstract>We&#8217;ve been discussing this at length here. Right now, comments as an anti-fraud measure always lead us to a no-win situation. If we take the side of ...</abstract>
    <user>
      <id type="integer">7689</id>
      <name>Kevin Yank</name>
      <display_name>Kevin Yank</display_name>
    </user>
  </response>
  <created_at type="datetime">2008-05-22T14:54:30Z</created_at>
  <updated_at type="datetime">2008-05-22T14:54:30Z</updated_at>
  <page deprecated="true">
    <key>general</key>
  </page>
</suggestion>
<suggestion>
  <id type="integer">106759</id>
  <url>http://marketplace.uservoice.com/pages/781-general/suggestions/106759-stop-allowing-sellers-to-use-spammy-titles</url>
  <title>Stop allowing sellers to use spammy titles</title>
  <abstract>I'm getting sick and tired of seeing this type of stuff: ##&gt;&gt; $1200/Month, Top Ranking, Automated, Very Unique Site! &lt;&lt;## or &#9608;&#9608;&#9658; Established PR3 Web Directory for Sale,High Alexa Rank 288,768 
...</abstract>
  <text>I'm getting sick and tired of seeing this type of stuff: ##&gt;&gt; $1200/Month, Top Ranking, Automated, Very Unique Site! &lt;&lt;## or &#9608;&#9608;&#9658; Established PR3 Web Directory for Sale,High Alexa Rank 288,768 

- These types of characters (&#9608;&#9608;&#9658;, ##&gt;&gt; etc) makes Sitepoint look a bit unprofessional allowing this sort of thing going on. it also gains an unfair advantage for the seller, as his/her listing is noticed more quicker than normal auctions.</text>
  <closed_at nil="true"></closed_at>
  <vote_count type="integer">11</vote_count>
  <comments_count type="integer">0</comments_count>
  <status nil="true"></status>
  <forum>
    <id type="integer">781</id>
    <name>General</name>
    <key deprecated="true">general</key>
  </forum>
  <response nil="true"></response>
  <created_by>
    <supporter>
      <user>
        <id type="integer">10174</id>
        <display_name>babyboy808</display_name>
        <name deprecated="true">babyboy808</name>
        <username deprecated="true">babyboy808</username>
      </user>
    </supporter>
  </created_by>
  <created_at type="datetime">2009-01-20T16:30:55Z</created_at>
  <updated_at type="datetime">2009-01-20T16:30:55Z</updated_at>
  <page deprecated="true">
    <key>general</key>
  </page>
</suggestion>
<suggestion>
  <id type="integer">5867</id>
  <url>http://marketplace.uservoice.com/pages/781-general/suggestions/5867-let-sellers-require-bidders-to-make-a-deposit-before-bidding</url>
  <title>Let sellers require bidders to make a deposit before bidding</title>
  <abstract>since multiple account making is not new on SP or on any other popular webmaster forum, its just useless giving -ve feedback to anyone as he is free to make a new id anytime he wants and as regarding...</abstract>
  <text>since multiple account making is not new on SP or on any other popular webmaster forum, its just useless giving -ve feedback to anyone as he is free to make a new id anytime he wants and as regarding calling and verifying through telephone number, i feel this will also not work out. for example say i am in UK and some buyer is from say Australia and he is verified by phone by SP mods or admin or whatever. he bids on my auction and doesn&#8217;t pay. what do i have to do with his cell number? do i make repeated ISD calls to him and ask him to pay?
i suggest SP should make initiatives like only those bidders can bid who deposit say like 20% of their bids to SP account which SP will pay to seller in case that particular bidder wins the auction and pays the rest to seller and in case any other bidder wins, he is liable to get back his money from SP. this is the only way to weed out fake bidders or it can be like CC verification wherein SP people should charge his CC in case he don&#8217;t pays the seller.
if some workable measures like these can be workout, SP would be the best place to work with. SP charges sellers for putting up their auctions but with no surety of being paid by bidders. Like in e-bay, if a bidder doesn&#8217;t pays, e-bay don&#8217;t charge its fees for that particular auction as seller is at no fault on that occasion.
I also ask other fellow sellers to put their valuable suggestions to counter this increasing problem.</text>
  <closed_at nil="true"></closed_at>
  <vote_count type="integer">86</vote_count>
  <comments_count type="integer">4</comments_count>
  <status nil="true"></status>
  <forum>
    <id type="integer">781</id>
    <name>General</name>
    <key deprecated="true">general</key>
  </forum>
  <response nil="true"></response>
  <created_by>
    <supporter>
      <user>
        <id type="integer">9559</id>
        <display_name>site.developer</display_name>
        <name deprecated="true">site.developer</name>
        <username deprecated="true">site.developer</username>
      </user>
    </supporter>
  </created_by>
  <created_at type="datetime">2008-05-28T05:06:21Z</created_at>
  <updated_at type="datetime">2008-05-28T13:11:53Z</updated_at>
  <page deprecated="true">
    <key>general</key>
  </page>
</suggestion>
  </supported_suggestions>
  <created_at type="datetime">2008-05-29T23:24:06Z</created_at>
  <updated_at type="datetime">2009-05-02T21:29:41Z</updated_at>
</user>
