Fixing the co-op forum II (continuing the discussion)

We came from here: http://davesgarden.com/community/forums/t/921974/

I'm going to repeat the first post of the above thread, for those just now finding the discussion. Please do take a look at the other thread also, as we have been generating a lot of ideas there!

The DG co-op forum was closed last week Wednesday.

Here is the initial thread discussing the closing: http://davesgarden.com/community/forums/t/921605/
Further complaints or comments on this action by admin should please be directed to the above thread.

There seem to have been 2 separate issues with the co-ops: people "fronting" a co-op for a vendor to get around the "no vendors" rule, and too many Dmails and spillage into other areas of DG when co-ops go bad. Dave has verified (on the other thread) that these were indeed the major problems leading to the closing of the forum.

In this post [HYPERLINK@davesgarden.com] Dave said he would be willing to reconsider the decision if we could find a solution to those 2 problems.

That's what this thread is for. Please, constructive suggestions or feedback only! This is not the place for negativity or flaring tempers. If we can self-police this thread to keep it positive, Dave may have hope that we can find a way of similarly self-policing when tempers flare due to co-op problems.

There's another thread for discussing alternatives to the co-op forum, in case we can't figure out a "fix." http://davesgarden.com/community/forums/t/921953/. Let's try to keep these discussions as focused as possible, to make it easier for admin and everybody else to follow.

Thanks, everybody!

This message was edited Nov 11, 2008 9:46 AM

Critter, Please read my last post on the prior thread, we cross posted.

Critter asked me to summarize and continually update here the ideas discussed for solutions to Administration's two greatest concerns. Please feel free to discuss all aspects of coop improvement on this thread. I am also working, so will update this post when possible. If you feel that I've missed anything, please feel free to Dmail me.

Membership Complaints:

1) Ignore them
2) Have the Administration reply to them with a "form" email restating the "buyer Beware" policy.
3)Have Administration forward all complaints to a member Group to review and answer appropriately.
3A)Have complaints automatically sent to a Buffer Group who filters & solves easy ones and forwards the others to Administration.
4)Standardize and improve the coop processes and communications, such as spreadsheets and opening informational posts, so that fewer complaints arise
5)Create a Disclaimer "Button" that all members have to accept prior to coop participation
6)Staff the coops with volunteer moderator/monitors/stewards to quell potential problems
7) Establish some eligibility criteria for Hosts to ensure well run trouble free coops
8)Require back up hosts on all coops should a need for help arise
9)Apply some visable consequences to errant members such as temporary prohibition from coops
10)Enlist the help of membership to diminish spillover of coop issues onto other threads. Apply potential coop suspension to persistant violators
11)Disable, Limit or Suspend Dmail capability for abusers.
12)Temporary closing of troubled coops while volunteers determine whether to close it permanently.
13)Obtain and post each vendor's guarantee and let the member and the vendor solve the problem
14)Transfer the responsibilty for refunds to a third party such as Paypal or a Credit Card or the Shipping Company
15)Implementation of some sort of rating icon (stars, thorns) after a Hosts' ID to apprise member of past performance
16)The use of a post-coop survey to inspire overall improvements, provide feedback for rating Host and Vendor and affording members a venue to vent, hopefully eliminating many complaints directed to DG
17)Impose limits on the # of participants and products offerred per coop to insure good control., also limit Hosting to one coop at a time
18)Organize a volunteer group of experienced Hosts as a resource for anyone wanting to learn how to run a coop
19)Create a Coop Watchdog similar to the Garden Watchdog and let this be the only grievance arena except for cases of Fraud and AUP violation
20) apply some consequence for draining DG resources by making an invalid or unwarranted coop complaint
21) have vendor run coops and require they provide guaranties
22) for guarantees seekers, have coop suppliers also offer some of the plants in classified but at a higher price. Post link on the coop thread to ad
23)open an entry in garden watchdog for all coop suppliers and hosts and vendors
24) encourage the use of member vendors to supply all coops
25)have buyers pay a non-refundable fee to place an order in a coop to cover the costs of cancelled orders. If no one cancels, refund the fee to all or donate it to charity
26)create a permanent thread in the coop forum that is a buyer's guide. Have all coop interest & order threads include a link to the guide for new members and shoppers.
27)create a permanent thread in the coop forum that is a Hosting guide.



Vendor Issues


1) Administration or Member Group enforcement of existing policy by closing coops where shilling is suspected until an investigation can be completed.
2) Amend the existing policy and allow member vendor coop participation as a Host, but assess a coop fee or require an advertising subscription as part of admission
3) Require a period of paid active membership for Hosts to prevent the use of shills.
4) Have a member group review and vett applications for coops
5) Allow vendor members to Host & Run their own Coops, but charge them a higher membership fee
6) Assess a coop fee to all coops, thereby voiding the need for the member/vendor restriction on Hosting
7)After interest is established require all Coops to purchase a Classified AD and drop the vendor member hosting prohibition
8)Move the coops out of the regular forums, but place them, or some other type of venue that operates similar to a coop, in one of the Marketing arenas, still restricting them to paid subscribers, but with different AUP & problem resolution process
9)Redefine who is a vendor
10)Create a sticky posted eligible coop vendor list comprised of ad purchasers and vendors who pay fees to get and stay on the list. For deeply discounted coop offerings, allow the host to pay the fee and recoup it through the cost of the purchases
11)impose coop fees only on non affiliated vendors
12) require membership or advertising for all coop sponsors
13)MAKE COOP FEE EQUAL TO PRICE OF MEMBERSHIP OR AD, NOT CLASSIFIED COST
14)allow vendor hosted coops, but only in the marketing area
15)open all coop interest threads with an invitation for suppliers to reply by dmail
16)assign an identifier icon along with vendors user id
17)create 2 categories of member vendors and charge higher member fees for those who want to market on DG
18)create a vendor profile listing with links to their dmail or website
19)break classifieds into 3 or more sections such as professional vendors, home gardeners, vendor hosted coops, non gardening items
20)forward all prospective non afilliated coops sponsors to DG to either buy memberships, classified ads or ad subscriptions
21)have concerned shoppers monitor coop interest threads to steer coop supply opportunities to members and advertisers
22)encourge members NOT VENDORS to post alerts in the forums when they see a good ad or vendor hosted coop in the classifieds



I intentionally omitted those ideas here that involve DG Classifieds as this thread is about fixing the coops.

This message was edited Nov 11, 2008 12:55 PM

This message was edited Nov 11, 2008 1:15 PM

This message was edited Nov 11, 2008 1:43 PM

This message was edited Nov 11, 2008 6:01 PM

This message was edited Nov 11, 2008 8:28 PM

This message was edited Nov 11, 2008 8:58 PM

This message was edited Nov 12, 2008 7:45 PM

This message was edited Nov 13, 2008 2:56 AM

This message was edited Nov 14, 2008 1:13 PM

This message was edited Nov 14, 2008 1:20 PM

This message was edited Nov 14, 2008 1:25 PM

This message was edited Nov 15, 2008 10:10 AM

This message was edited Nov 15, 2008 10:14 AM

This message was edited Nov 15, 2008 4:27 PM

Critter, could you take a look at my suggestion on the "Alternatives" thread and give your opinion?

I offer to do anything I can to help this - be a committee member, etc. I don't know of any serious violations I have had with my coops with Bloomingbulb and other than a few drop out problems, do not think I was a bad host.
Kathy

I also volunteer to serve in whatever way necessary to keep the coops going. Still believe the first committe members (if we go that direction), need to be members who have been around awhile, know the ropes, and are known to be fair and impartial.

I also agree that mentors for the new coop hosts or hostesses is a good idea, but don't know that it should be manatory for everyone. Especially for the packing and shipping part. Some of us don't live close enough to other members to make that feasible.

I'm heading out the door but will look through everything when I get back... Stormy, if you posted a new thought at the end of the previous thread, you might want to repeat it here. :-)

I'm happy there's so much enthusiasm and willingness to work on getting co-ops restarted in some form or other!

Ok...it's hard to continue from one thread to the next... Maybe I need two windows open at the same time.

Cat commented that the mentor shouldn't be mandatory for all hosts, however, it's not so much a person who would be doing anything, but be there and be familiar with the issues, the silent "partner" and liason to whatever entity decides disputes. That mentor would not be physically available for the most part.

Everyone in the co-op would know that that person is the one to go to if there is a problem that has not been resolvable between individuals.

The mentor might also play the devil's advocate when the buy gets too big, or reason is blinded by beautiful plants and something doesn't seem quite right.

Until admin comments, I'm not sure there is much more to say. We can't build on ideas until the ideas are deemed worthwhile. :-)



This message was edited Nov 11, 2008 9:59 AM

Critter asked me to help make this process easier for everyone by continually updating my revised first post in this thread. I've tried my best, but will need all of your help. Thanks!!!!

Stormy - could you add under Member Complaints the suggestion for a star or other icon to identify coop hosts? I'm thinking here of how to head off complaints. Similar to having a standardize process for coops as mentioned under # 4. Kind of a proactive way to insure smoother coops.

Done langbr, Thanks! I must have omitted some from the vendor issues. Can anyone help?

Very helpful comments, 4Paws.

Oooh. Here's an idea.

ON the Contact Us portion, where they select the topic that they're contacting admin about, put "Co-op Problem". When they select it, it re-directs them to Disney.

hehe.

Old Skool

Chris

Groan.

Buried...hehehe...
Thanks, Stormyla. I'm impressed with your distillation and very pleased it has been posted. I considered attempting it and just knew there was someone better able already on it, and I was right! Now to study it...

Geez,
It would be easier to get a job with the CIA than start a co-op. LOL

Thanks!!!!

What if co-op participants, hosts, AND vendors, all fill out a "brief" exit poll of their co-op experience. This would give:

1- a basis for the Host/Hostess rating stars,
2- possible ratings for vendors,
3- give more insight for the monitoring committee to reoccurring problems,
4- most importantly give the participants a place to vent and show appreciation.

The poll results would be retrieved by the co-op monitoring committee, not DG Admin.

I think the reason most folks complain is because they feel they have no other recourse for satisfaction, even about simple things, so they feel a need to vent somewhere and it's naturally going to be to other DGers on other forums. Maybe an exit poll with a comment block (200 characters) would be just enough to let them get whatever it is off their chest.

A few of the co-ops hosts say they had no problems with their co-op, but how would they know if any complaints were not told to them?

Maybe the monitoring committee could have a PR person to deal with poll complaint issues. And again, habitual problems/offenders could be more readily seen using this, or some type of, post co-op participation.

I hope something can be worked out to get the co-ops back online... I didn't get to participate in one yet!

Bev

http://davesgarden.com/community/forums/p.php?pid=5776922
This is RatherB's post last night regarding formation/maintenance of a committee...responsibility, accountability, authority...
I thought it was a valuable post.

I completely agree with RatherB's committee "responsibility, accountability, authority..." post!! It's either all or nothing for it to properly work.

I agree in theory; in fact, I posted something similar here: http://davesgarden.com/community/forums/p.php?pid=5774290

However, I have some serious misgivings about whether a committee of volunteers can be expected to shoulder this responsibility: http://davesgarden.com/community/forums/p.php?pid=5778277

Some members feel their subscription or tenure entitles them to challenge an administrator. Why would those members gracefully accept an unfavorable decision from their peers?

So...let's focus on ideas to prevent and avoid complaints, rather than trying to set up a complex system of rules and regulations to follow.

I forget who said this near the end of the last thread, but this is so true.

" I think the vendor policies made public regarding each co-op is extremely important. I think that if the vendor refuses, then it is up to the buying group, fully aware of that lack, deciding whether or not to continue."

This is what soem folks don't accept. If a buyer has no refund policies, then I ask aroudn or check watchdog or feedback and if I see good stuff, I jump both feet in, realizing and hey if it bad, it bad and I lose , no tears or whinnign about it. I may lose some money, but it not supposed to be more than what I want to lose just like in a lottery or card game.

These folks seem to only think about gettign cheap price when they realise it not band box size they moan and complain totally disregarding the no refund policy and the at risk policies.

We need DG member vendors. Other than a few people spoiling it, it has workign smoothly I think. I woudl liek to se emore Dg member vendors used, but so far the outside and inside seem to be goign good togeter on the coops not to many of either one.

4paws was exactly right when she said

Terry, do you think that having co-op "mentors" (especially for newer hosts but maybe for any co-op) would help to "prevent and avoid complaints" by providing guidance (if and only if needed; I agree with previous posts that mentoring should be pretty hands-off) and keeping an eye on the general tone of things?

With mentors, some things could still end up on admin's desk for attention/decision/action, but hopefully a lot of those things could be fixed before they blew up into a big problem.

Or is that idea subject to similar shortfalls? not different enough from having a committee?

I'm going to have to start printing some of this out...I'm losing track in this format. Terry, I don't know how I missed a lot of that first post of yours that you linked to. I haven't been keeping up with the alternatives thread (this is taking a lot of brain power, much to my surprise, in between other tasks). I think I need to step back a bit and lurk... :-) I'm not gone, but my thinking is backed up. :-)

What we are doing here is really important, don't you all agree? Working together like this, in print? I have such a hard time with print because no hands and faces and tones.... It's kind of tiring, but a worthwhile effort, yes?

I think (personal opinion) that an informal mentoring system is fine. I don't know that it makes much sense to try to impose a mentor relationship.

I hear you on "less is more" when it comes to regulations... Maybe just knowing (via a line in the first post) that a co-op had a behind-the-scenes mentor, and/or a backup person, co-host, etc. would give people an increased sense of security about participating in co-ops that had good backup.

How about a co-op steward for every co-op. This person would have the absolute power to handle all issues brought forth with the co-op. This person would have to be a seasoned co-op host voted in by the members have a good record and follow a set of rules put together by the members. There could be one steward for every co-op running, The host or hostess could pick from a pool of stewards that are available to help out.

Of the 15 ideas listed above under the complaint section, 9 are items designed to prevent complaints.

I can see why the Administration is reluctant to turn grievance resolution over to the members. Some problems that arise from coop activity are NOT coop problems. Nasty and intimidating posts can happen on any forum and are covered by the AUP. I'm assuming that there are previously established consequences to this type of unacceptable use.

Perhaps as has been suggested previously, all complaints should go first through a member screening, where membership could attempt to resolve them and only valid or unresolved ones should be passed over to Administration. This is not turning it over to membership, rather asking their assistance with it to free up DG's resources.

There is merit to Sundownr's idea if it could be kept simple.

Critter, Are you using "mentor" in it's true meaning, or interchangably to include "backup Host", Monitor, Moderator?

Why is there so little discussion, particularly from the Administration, of the vendor issue? Several members have requested that the policy be changed.There's been no feedback at all from the Administration on this.

Maybe if a new person just absolutely didn't want a mentor, they could be limited to amounts or choices?
I have no problem at all with mentors or mentoring. I'm just afraid it could easily become the mentors coop if not handled very carefully. Some personalities are stronger than others, and in their desire to help, they might not be able to stop themselves from doing too much. Or advising too much. Etc. That is my only misgiving on the idea. The "hands off unless truly needed" policy would be very important.

Y a all what I just realized.

I knwo Dave is busy. He got crops and gardens and think he has animals too to tend, but just look.

granted we all tryign to work on ideas, but just sitting here while we all try to find a solution is eactly what Dave and Terry and Mmelody have to go through day in and day out with all the complaints from all over Dg and we just discussing co-ops.

Thsi why Dave and Terry have headaches. Can you imagine how many complaints they must get aday from all over Dg not just the coops and they never say a word.

Folks think and I playign devils advocate here. That a comittee and such might work. I also see just from all of us tryig to find a reasonable way that so many folks, me include d all have difernt opinions and different ideas and few agree together and lots don't.

So how comitiee and group mentor s suppose dto agree. How logn before oen of them says I don't think you should have aid or done that to another ommitte meber and then Dave gonan not only have buyer. host/vendor problems he gonna have comittee ones too. How logn before a good Dg;'er that fair gets pushe d around by a stronger just as good Dg on committiee.

Again I playign Devils advocate cu for evry up there a down somewhere's. Just some of the falls somebody at the bottom holding a pilow out for ya. : )

As I have said - I know some of you doubt it - but the co-op I did had no problems -a couple people misspelled my email address for pay pal - that's all - I know there's no feedback - - but if you doubt - check with any of my participants

I like the 3 points responsibility, accountability, authority - a host should have all three

A) Some hosts probably don't like the idea of a mentor - too many cooks spoil the broth - what if we call this person an observer - not involved - just keeping an eye - making sure problems, complaints aren't getting out of hand before any admin is aware

I think some of the explanations or ideas are making it more complicated than it is

Two main problems I've seen with hosts

1- hosting too many at the same time - I'm sorry but No one can juggle that much
2 -including too many products or participants - if you can't fit it on a spreadsheet - it's too much - even if you can handle it - everything would go
smoother if you have
a)smaller - quicker co-ops - participants get tired waiting for their orders from the larger co-ops
b)or ones that direct ship from vendor - as in the one with AM Leonard - there was a phone# - a contact person -
to get the special prices - all you did was id yourself as a DG subscriber -
When I ordered - I paid w/ visa checkcard received my order two days later

I've been the person in charge of all accounts for a company (payable, receivable, general ledger, payroll, petty cash, taxes )
-the more you have on your plate - the more chance there is for something to go wrong

Also still waiting for reply/comment from admin regarding non-plant related vendors being able to offer a flat discount & free shipping for DG members

no doubts, here, about your co-op, Kitty.
No one can say what another can juggle, either in participants or products, but experience is a good indicator.
Spreadsheets are adjustable.
Not all co-ops can be quick. We order glads and lilies in November for the spring early, to be sure we get the first ones shipped.
Not all vendors can offer shipping. It's a big expense. They aren't set up for small orders. Co-operative buys are just not all created equal. Not everyone has a credit card.

Always true, the more that's on your plate, the greater the chance you'll miss the taste of something (or can't eat it all).

Terry - we cross posted - this was my question on the earlier thread

for vendors.... that are dg members I have several suggestions:

a) make them pay for a DG ad, and sell the items there or in the DG market place (current policy)

b) make them pay for an ad with a link to a co-op thread and have a DG member host the co-op. (no vendor input on the thread allowed)

c) make them pay a higher fee for membership which will give them rights to host their own co-ops.


As for the other issues....

I want to hear from Admin their thoughts on some of the other suggestions...

The 'acceptance' buttons for co-op participants AND hosts

The mandatory mentor for a co-op... which I believe should be for all co-ops no matter how long or how experienced the hostess is. the mentor be a silent person but named in the first post of the co-op, and have access to all spreadsheets, and information...so in case someone became ill and couldnt finish a co-op, the mentor (hand picked by the hostess) would be able to step in and finish the co-op. The mentor would also take complaints and help resolve those issues before they became out of control.

The star (or horns!) rating on a co-op hostess somehow put under their name in the co-op forum (like where the city and zone are) to show how many successful co-ops they have run. I think this would be especially helpful so if someone is brand new, but their mentor is very experienced... I'd be more apt to join the co-op.

can we get some feedback from admin to see if any of these ideas are feasable? pweeze?

Kitty.. For somebody like you who can't advertise can you may take apic of all your product and put on your my infopage here abig pictrue of it and just say got this product? I do!

Might get some folks to do that initial asking to ya about it.

Note from Dave: http://davesgarden.com/community/forums/t/922826/

Something I suggested, but didn't make it to the summary..what about a small "co-op fee"..that way even if a vendor is "shilling" they are still paying for the "advertising" if you will..
I certainly wouldn't mind splitting a small fee to continue to have the opportunity for co-ops

I was actually thinking of the "mentor" role as not necessarily being the same as being a backup person or a co-host (possibly the same person could fill more than one role, however, but I haven't thought that through). I think it's a good thing, especially for newer hosts, to have somebody to give suggestions when asked, provide guidance, and give a heads-up if they spot potential pitfalls.

I agree that a mentor should generally take a very hands-off approach... in fact, it seems to me that most of the exchanges between a mentor and a host should be via Dmail. A co-host would probably need to post on co-op threads, but most of the time there should be no reason for a mentor to do so.

Another possible solution to the "vendor issue" is being discussed on the "alternatives" thread: creating a forum specifically for member-vendor group purchase/discount opportunities (possibly like Classifieds but with threads?)... We should probably continue discussion of that idea from the other thread, if possible. Here's the post where Starlight introduced the idea: http://davesgarden.com/community/forums/p.php?pid=5779455 (clicking "alternatives to co-ops" above the post brings you back to that spot on the thread).

4paws - just to clarify - I wasn't saying that some can't handle huge co-ops - some have shown their proficiency - but that it would be BETTER and have less chance for problems if it could be kept smaller/quicker - realize there is no one size fits all

1Anjl - Yes - by all means - make them pay - I don't have a problem with that - just the legality of contracts - that I'm under -- probably others have these concerns too - or just passed it off as a won't work

I think most hosts are afraid that a mentor is going to take over control - I wouldn't want that - what's the saying - A winner always wants the ball - control - that is -
I think they should have observer status- role be more low key - report to admin if something is wrong - I don't think anyone needs to even know who they are - Admin keeps an eye on all forums - you never know when or who - unless they say something - this person should not be jumping in giving their two cents on everything - second guessing the host - that is frustrating not helpful - I think any host would have the ability to ask if they needed someone to take over in case of illness, etc.
actually Anjl - some have helped others - without any public knowledge