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

Let's say I have a nursery near me and I'm over there looking for bargains for my house. I get to talking with the owner and he mentions he's got 50 plants he'd sell at a good discount, 75% off, but all 50 plants would have to go. I start thinking coop at DG and realize it can't happen for the following reasons: 1) I didn't initiate the deal so that would make me a shill. 2) I can't buy the lot because it would make me a vendor. 3) Even if I initiated the idea of having a coop he's not on the list of approved suppliers.

No wonder so many people are seeking a way around the rules. It's been my experience people can't plan their way into a good deal. A person usually stumbles upon one.

gk1153, we really do want to find a way to fix this problem, while being fair to all vendors.

But keep in mind the situation you described is a little different than if your nursery friend called you up and asked you to help him offload his surplus plants to your DG friends ;o)

I haven't had a chance to totally catch up here yet,, but gettignthere, but before I forget my train of thought...

Sorm I believeit was said this. .. " Many people here keep looking for guarantees. They also want to buy plants at 30% of the retail price and still expect a guaranty. How unrealistic are those expectations? The plants in the DG Marketplace cost more because the vendors are willing to offer guarantees."

How very very true!!!!!!!! This is a big part of the complaints. A host asks a vendor, eithe rnon menber or menber for say bulbs. Those bulbs wil come from Holland to the states, check through customs, an dsit until claimed by stateside company. Thes ebulbs cna have traveled along distance and are sittign a month before arriving at main distribution cente r for sorting. Then they to a vendor. Wher e they sit til the vendor can sell them. A hos tcalls the company for a coop, th evendor says sure. Well thos ebulbs can be sitting weeks to months an dthen they spend another week at the host house for ortign and packing. More handling and more of the bulbs not in the proper storage areas and temps. Then they another week or two gettign to buyer.

Same with plants they come from grower to vendor to host to buyer and that process from vendor to host and buyer may seem short but is actually 2 and even three weeks in some cases.

So people gets plants at a discount and expect perfection which they are not gonna get like if they went to walmart . And then they complain.

I see folsk all the time buy discoutned plants for a quarter and they take them home nd kill them and tak ethe ded plant and stil want there money back or replacement of a brand ne wfull pric eplant and they squak and cause disturbances until they get their way.

Turn aroudn time on product is a big problem with complaints. From vendor to host to buyer. Thes eplants are subjected to light and cold and extreme heat adn dark and high humidity and no water or air for weeks and folsk expect a quarentee and fresh.

When I get a discount, I expect not perfect. I understand the transport time involved of the plants and know ahed of time if they will survive the journey. Ask how many of the coop buyers ever consider that. They dont so they expect more than what they get for a discount.

but Terry - even if someone's Nursery buddy wanted to offload surplus to us. If it's a great deal - don't we want to avail ourselves of the deal? I don't see where that's bad. I see that as where we find deals we wouldn't have elsewhere.

Havign those rules in place, helps to keep folks from using the goodness of Dg folks from buying less than quality surplus and using Dg as a dumping ground and them getting the profits and smiling all the way to the bank and leaving Dg folks headaches when they have bought At risk plants. The vendors know it At risk.

One vendor dumps excess on dg and spreads the word to his buddie s how he got rid of hi s stock and made money and so that vendor does the same. If the rule saren't in place then th ecomplaints would be more than they are for receiving bad product.

gk, If the vendor list had continuously open enrollment, you as host, on the nurseryman's behal,f could pay his list fee and then build it into the price of the plants.

Let's say two nuseries want to have a year-end close-out sale.

Nursery A buys an ad here, and does things "by the book."

Nursery B has a friend at DG, and asks them to run a "co-op" (that really isn't a co-op, since no one asked for the plants), so they essentially get a free ad.

Just because participants are getting a great deal, does it make it okay for Vendor B to use the co-op forum in a way it was never intended to be used? Is that fair to Vendor A?

The premise of the forum was that it would not be motivated by profit.

Obviously, the organizer should not be motivated by profit--they represent the interests of the participants.

The vendor is going to make a profit, but the purchase should not be their idea--someone brought a bulk order to them and asked them to supply it, just as they would to anyone who knocked on their door and wanted to buy from them. Therefore, they are not manipulating the DG forum for profit. They just happened to be the vendor selected by the group.

For a vendor to approach DG members and offer to sell to them is not a co-op, no matter how good the discount is. That's why we have other marketing opportunities available to vendors.

Peg, The problem here is that DG does not want to give any vendor direct access to DG member's buying power for free when other companies have to pay for that access via advertising. It is not fair to the advertisers. You could still have the deal, just the coop fee would have to be paid by the nursery or passed onto the members.

I can see the point Terry is making. While the deal I described may be in the gray area it could fall into the "no harm no foul" category. If my nursery buddy calls me in the future and asks if I am willing to help him out with overstock plants then it would be a definite foul; a blatant disregard of the rules.

If the first time works well then we would have time to get within the rules (guidelines) before we do it again.

Edited to add (after Storm's post): A coop fee would help level the playing field while reducing the necessity of installing more guidelines.

This message was edited Nov 12, 2008 11:07 PM

Terry, I was responding to Peg's post in the context of having a coop fee, not under the existing rules.

Terry made it a point very early in this process to clearly state DG's position that if members persistantly want to engage in coops that circumvent their no shilling mandate and other rules designed to protect the interests of their advertisers' continued sponsorhip, that coops would be discontinued permanently.

This very same question keeps popping up so evidently the issue is not understood by some members. I'd like to try another way of presenting this quandry.

In order for a coop to be a success, three parties must benefit or at least not be disadvantaged. Ideally, all three would benefit.

Those parties are the members, DG, and the advertisers.

Using Peg's scenario

Benefit to DG- happy members continue to buy subscriptions. More gardeners want to join DG to get in on the deals, so more members by subscriptions

Disadvantage to DG- paying advertisers are disadvantaged and stop buying ads. New member subscriptions are probably not enough to overcome the lost advertising revenues. Distressed and end of season stock does not meet some member expectations and complaints increase

Benefit to paying advertisers - None

Disadvantage to paying advertisers - $ paid for advertising while non paying competitors are getting the profits

Benefit to members - members get cheap prices on good or maybe not so good plants

Disadvantage to members - lost advertising revenue has to be recouped from somewhere, membership fees increase dramatically.
Plants are potentially not good and there is no restitution for lost $.Quality ad purchasing vendors get disenchanted and stop offering good deals to DG coops. Because of increased complaints, DG terminates coops.

The acid test for every coop under the existing rules:

Does DG win?

Do the members win?

Do the Advertisers win?

If the answer is no to any of these three questions, then it's not a successful coop.

Starlight, I find the points made in both of your posts to be very valid.

1Anjl, Let's hope that good things come to those who wait!

DGers, Please just don't lurk. Please post your ideas here.

If you don't have any new ideas, can you suggest improvements to some of those already mentioned?

Coop Hosts, can any of you comment on what effect a coop fee might have on your ability to negotiate good deals?

Members, if more of you would like the Administration to rethink their position on member vendor hosted coops, please present the advantages to everyone.

Attention Coop shoppers! What changes would provide a more pleasant shopping experience?

Well - I guess I should post - I'm all 3 - Fee for co-op - shouldn't be a problem - depends of how much it is and how many participants

The only negative I've heard is the negative effect vendor co-ops would have on advertizers - perhaps a solution - if they have advertisement - no fee for co-op? Make the fee for vendor co-op the same net effect as if it were advertisement - including any percentage that would include -make them guarantee goods - puts them on an equal playing field - right now non-advertising member vendors are penalized

Admin - If this would work for you - I have a question - Could a vendor co-op have a host - would a vendor co-op be required to have a separate host? -
Also would vendors be able to host a co-op for something they are not the supplier?

Just had this thought. Have had time to expland on it, but have reading storm's three thinsg thing this hit me.

This is not an all fix to those that will still go behind scenes.

What most hostess don't know or don't remember is that alot of dg membre vendors can get you the same thing that non vendors do most of the time. It may be a quarter or fifty cent more, there generally always one or more member vendors who have acees to the same orginigal distributor as non vendors.

The dg members pay their dues, non vendors don't , do what if a host does an interest thread. She goes to the non vendor and says hey I have 50 people who want this product. We would liek to deal deal with yoru company and have your company put on our list of ptoential vendors to choose from. Tell the non member vendor, these are our rules for vendoring our coops. You need to be a dg member vendor, the fee is $$ per year. The benefits of joining would allow you to be asked to participate in future coops and have yoru company listed in the members book for future possible sales from the ####### membership that DG has.

Then the host say somethign like , we really would like to have you be a member vendor for this coop, so would you be intereste din payign the small membership fee and Would you consider giving us a discount?

I doubt there is more than one or two folks if that , that have evert asked a non-member vendor to join and become a member vendor.

The hosts just hunt and google thil they find anybody that has what they want and says hey, we want a discount and never stops to think about DG or the member vendors, they just so focused on getting what they want.


This would increase dg member vendorships. Put a little bit more secuirty in the coop as their feedback would be listed for members to see, it will also slow down or stop some of the just out for profit and dumping vendors from taking advantage o the coops , they cna use the classified too and the market place and classified same as other folks or keep to their own websites.

For example, and I cannot and will not say who, but i watched a coop come from an outside vendor, this vendor, was a non dg member, th e prcie was put up, now I happened to know of a good dg member vendor that would have not only guarenteed their product, but woudl have brought in fresh product at 1/3 of what them coop folks are payign to virtually a stranger for old left over product, but as a dg member vendor, I could not contact our Dg memmerb at let them know hey I knwoya got this and yoru stuff good. I couldn't dmail them and say hey look at the classifieds, and I sure couldn't warn the buers cuz it at an an risk and member vendors cannot promote each other. I hoped and hoped somebody would dig a bit deepr in th emember vendors lists and see them.

Didn't happen and I felt bad for th emember losing potential sales, Dg didn't get no advertising or membership fees, buyers got a way les s than perfect product which they complained about and didn't know they paid an exorborant price for what they got.

So maybe having the hosts ask the noinmembers to join should be something thrown out there to them.

Maybe having buyer s more informed and help too like a few doo search through all the member vendors for the same product with better quality and complaint policies.

Maybe making buyers really stop and think somehow or this where just maybe some dg regular coop buyers not as any form of committee , but as CONCERNED SHOPPERS , I like that term, as then it doesn't put anybody on a committiee and in th e position of being on the brunt end of complaints and having to make decisions. could gently step in and say " hey , I just popping in here as a concerned shopper, here someother places, that are Dg member vendors that might give ya even a better deal or equal with better refund policies. "

The Concerned Shopper, just makes a post like that, not gettign into final decisions, or anything, just one simple post that just a gentle reminder for the unwary buyers too, that just cuz other folks are buying it may not be the best, and would also give those buyers , and we always gonna have them, that worry abotu losing money or gettign bad product a stop to re thinktheir decisions. Like if the concerned shopper is popping up that maybe she tryign to tell me somethign and I shoud listen before committing.

I think it might weed out some of the bad non vendor coops that , do not contribute anythign to Dg or its members in any form other than taking hard dirt working, plant lovings folks little bits of income.

starlight - why couldn't you have DMailed the host of the co-op and said "Hey did you know..." When hosts are looking for vendors they often take suggestions.

The most frustrating thing though is finding a quality product from a quality vendor (member or not) but not being able to purchase from them in bulk because we have no tax ID#, I still think no matter what that members who are vendors should be able to host.

Dave's lost a lot of members when they wouldn't let someone, who is probably the best co-op organizer I have ever seen, not do co-ops for plants because she sells pottery on eBay.

Peg.. Because I think under the current AUP that I still would have been thought maybe by somebody that I was was promoting one vendor as a vendor myself and thoguh it not like the shril of vendor. host, it still a form of current shrill.

Now nobody will admit t hey did any wrong, but I oprobably did wrong one time, not sure myself, I did see an interest thread. I saw from whom and what the folsk were considering. They were considering two types of product and I did jump in on that interest thread as a possible buyer for the one product , but knew the other was totally bad, told then of my experience and what th ebuyers woudl be facing. Unfortunately nobody listened and alot of folks lost product an dmoney, grante d not alot per individual but still out and then complained abotu it. Those that stuck to the good part of the product offered ended up with nice plants.

$$$$$$ signs and being un-informed buyers is what leads to most of the complaints. Buyers need to research alot better not just jump into a coop cuz they see a cheap price. Buyers need to look at coops liek they would be shopping for a major appliance , or car, or house.

Instead most look at it as a giant flea market for shopping but want exclusive shop product and guateentees.

Starlight and Peg, Is there a list of member vendors published on DG anywhere? The only member vendor that I personally know tries very hard to keep her vendor status secret so as not to run afoul of the no self promotion rule and outside of our regional forum, her posts never give any clues to her vendor status. On different forums, I've often wanted to suggest her as a good source for the plants being discussed, but I'm sure she would not appreciate it. She and I often post on the same threads and I wouldn't want to put her in an awkward position.

When members on those threads are discussing the sources for the plants, I often want to jump in and say, hey, xyz vendor who you all know has larger plants for a better price. I think that the no self promotion rule not only prohibits self promotion, but as has been stated previously, the fear of being suspected of self promotion or shilling, keeps members from recommending them and actually discourages member vendors from placing classified ads or supplying coops.

If members wanted to try to offer coop supply opportunities to member vendors first, is there a resource on DG identifying member vendors?

Maybe I'm not understanding, but when everyone is talking about vendors having to pay a fee to supply a coop, it concerns me. 2 of the main vendors I have done coops with are excellent, but to the best of my knowledge are not DG members. And like someone else said, they are large enough and have enough business outside DG, they don't have to do coops. I'm just trying to imagine what Blooming Bulb or Growers Solutions would tell me, if I call them up and tell them they have to pay a fee now to supply a coop. I would imagine the "fee" would end up being split between the coop participants in the majority of cases. So would it really help us?

Starlight & Peg, you both make very valid points. More member vendors supplying and hosting coops would improve the quality of items offered thereby reducing complaints. Complaints about these could be posted in the Garden Watchdog, and not to the Administration. Member vendors are the most disadvantaged parties here and that should be corrected.

What if every coop interest thread started off with,

I'm considering offering a coop for ------ items, or

I've found a nice opportunity with ------company who is offering -----

BUT, I would first like to offer this opportunity to a member vendor.

Does anyone know of a member vendor who also supplies this item?

or

Is there a member/vendor reading this thread who would want to supply the items in this Coop?

Seems like that might solve the no self promotion problem.

Coop hosts, what is the likelihood that most coop fees would end up being passed on to the members?

How many of your suppliers might be likely to place an ad or pay a coop fee if that were a requirement?

The only others ones I've done small coops with are Terra Nova and NC Farms. I would feel very uncomfortable having to ask any of the 4 to pay a fee.

Star & Stormy, I definitely like the idea of enabling more participation by member vendors in the co-ops... I think Stormy's idea of issuing an invitation for information like that would work, especially if you said "Please Dmail me" (which would keep the info off the public thread until/unless the host and the vendor reached an agreement).

Nice refinement, Critter.

Cat, Do you know if any of those vendors place ads on DG?

Does anyone know if there is any place on DG that lists the advertising vendors, other than classifieds?

Some of our vendors are enrolled in PlantScout : http://davesgarden.com/products/ps/

It is not a comprehensive list as the feature is not extremely old, but we do have a growing group.

We have urged Marketplace vendors to be listed in the Watchdog as this gives a good platform for feedback. Even tiny mom and pop operations are being listed there.

Stormy, if they do I haven't seen them. I just looked at the Plant scout link above and didn't see any of them

Melody, would it be very difficult for someone to populate the Plant Scout with all presently advertising vendors?

Many member/vendors do not use the Marketplace. What about when a vendor joins as a member their name is automatically added to the watchdog with the DG flower icon to indicate that they are a member?
Would it be difficult to add all of the present member/vendors to the watchdog?

Melody, is there someone at DG who solicits advertisers? If so, could Cat forward their names to you and they would call the companies to solicit ads?

PlantScout is a program where vendors who pass our standards can pay to advertise their product on the pages of the PlantFiles. Obviously, those who are the 'bottom feeders' in the Watchdog will never be allowed in. We would love to have reputable vendors list with us. The charge is determined by how many plants that they wish to link to. The entry level starts with up to 100 listings, but many of our smaller vendors will enroll despite only having 50 or 60 cultivars (I even did one the other day with 30) . It is quite affordable, even for very small operations.

Here is an example of PlantScout in action for those of you who are not familiar with it. http://davesgarden.com/guides/pf/go/55472/

The link is unoffensive to viewers who do not wish to purchase, but is quite helpful to those looking for the plant.

We do have an advertising dept and several programs that vendors can participate in. I forward several vendor requests a day to this dept.

Advertising here in a legitimate manner is not as expensive as you might think, and what better audience can you have than a group who are wanting to buy what you sell.

Those of you who have your ads turned off, turn them on for a bit and pay attention to the offerings. Now, we have the normal ads that most websites have, but we also have ads geared directly to the forums that you are actually looking at. We hope that we can encourage more of these vendors and be able to give you ads that you might actually want to view. (and click to buy the product...yep, we have those too)

Stormyla, I too like the idea of offering the coop supply opportunity to our own member vendors. I'd much rather support a member vendor with the same product at the same price than an outside vendor. I don't have any issues with outside vendors, but like the 'family' first idea. I believe that asking other members to recommend or suggest a vendor (inside DG or out) would be preferred. Recommendations based on previous use or knowledge of products/services are valuable. We ask friends for recommendations all the time. I think that eliminates the self promotion issue. IMO DG member vendors would be inclined to offer better products if not better pricing than outside vendors because of their relationships here.

I also feel that asking a vendor to pay for an ad on DG after we've requested that they be 'our' coop vendor is shabby. We solicited them because we liked their product/price/service, they shouldn't have to pay to provide us what we asked them to sell us; even at coop pricing. If the coop host/hostess wants/needs to take out an ad and add that onto per person/item charges to keep us in compliance, that's different.

Cat... I know of five dg member vendors that are active all over the forums that can supply the exact same product that the companies you mentioned offered and it would be fresher and you member vendor is supporting Dg.

Storm, that format is nice, at least it gets folks lookign for vendor members to shop with. Even if your buyers foudn a vendor member that said say had bulbs, you could dmail them and say. hey we foudn bulbs here, but want to support memmebr vendor sellers, can you do anthign about selling us pansies, for example.

That woudl not break the rules I believe as you have aske dthe vendor, the vendor cna then decide whether they want to do it or not. Most have the ability too , it jus whether or not they want to tak eonthe extra work for a coop, some will, some wont.

Vendors coudl still not with the rules, go on the thread and say Hey I can. Then ya gonna have vendors competign on the coop and vendor wars. Dg did a good job of keeping it so that dont happen whch is a good thing.

I hope at some point Dave gets a chance to read my manual LOL on suggestions for dg member vendors who want to participate in coops and either makes a thread abotu it or says I can open one up with some of the points to discussion. There was alot in there, some may point smay need ot be tweaked or figrue out legalities on, but I coudl see it workign to everybodys benefit.

Hi Starlight. If they can supply the same product at a similar price, and have enough quantity, then I hope the member/vendor idea works out! I have no problem shopping around and using vendors with the best deals. And getting good product is right up there at the top.

I think the biggest headache is the fact that are so many different type sof sellers. You have growers, retailers, wholesalers, dollar -store value types for lack of betetr word at the moment. You got big businesses, littl ebusinesse s and all the different size sin betweem and all have their preffered way of doign business that meets their company needs even if it jane and frank down the road to a million dollar seller company here on Dg.

Dave has to try his best to try and juggle all these differen ttype s basically into a few well thoughtout forums, a darn near impossible job. Liek he said , he also has responsibilitie s to the rest of the members on allthe forums, hundreds of them to make their experiences fun and good and not just the coop sections.

Dg is one of the most deversified forums aroudn the world there is, that in part why conflicts come up. What works and said here may be the sam ethign in another country but have a totally opposite meaning.

We used to be a nation of backyard, back fence visting , chatting neighbors and friends, now we have evolved into millions of tiny paranhias all wanting to be feed everythign we want, right now the way we want it. Dave Bless he's heart, has tried to take the downhome neighborly feeling and try and preserve it on Dg.

I cna see the constant battle and struggle for him to do this when we all want change for our needs. Dave how many grey hairs and stress wrinkles ya got now. LOL

Thank you, Melody and everyone.

Maybe a "for members eyes only" profile composite listing could be created that gives each member/vendor a place to put a brief summary of what products they offer. If that is not feasible, Perhaps member vendors could have some type of icon after their names, so we can recognize them and approach them with questions about their products. If they want to opt out of this, then we know that they aren't interested in marketing anything on DG.

Member vendors aren't getting away completely free, they are paying the membership fee. Maybe those who want to list their profile or carry an icon could be chanrged a higher membership fee.

Star, I think he's done a pretty good job of preserving that feeling, which I really appreciate, but also tends to make some members forget that he is running a business.

Maybe to address cat and Ladybugfan's concerns, if member/vendors interested in DG marketing opportunities paid a higher membership fee, they would not be expected to buy an ad or pay a coop fee.

In thinking more about member/vendors becoming more visible to the membership, along with that comes more opportunities for self promotion. I doubt that the Administration would like to see a lot of that in the forums. Perhaps, inquiries to member/vendors regarding their products could be limited to Dmail or off of DG by having links to their websites, perhaps on their blurbs on the profile pages.

I just want to make a little post-I have been lurking, but not posting unless I see something I think I need to comment on.

My co-ops are done with places that usually ONLY sell wholesale, but due to my large orders and the fact that I am a member here, they allow me to do co-ops with them. They ARE NOT equipped to ship plants as I do-one and twosies type shipping-and I doubt they would pay a fee...they get our business, which in all honesty must be a very small potion ov their overall business, and we get plants for $4 that at a nursery will be $17 each-like all the brand new echies...if we are unable to resolve the issue to keep them here, I would happily pay $5 in the classifieds to link to a co-op outside of DG if that is what it comes to, but I do think that keeping them in our community is to our advantage-more buying power=better discounts...

I think that vendor run co-ops that have ?? answered by the vendor and has them dmailing peeps to get info and such should be in the classifieds or marketplace-they are very different then the intent for co-ops to begin with-in a true co-op it is all shipped to one person to get the discount and then they pack and reship. The vendors that choose to do the classifieds could very well pass the cost of the add onto the participants-very feasible.

I have been trying to think of better ways to deal with the "cancerous attitudes" that seep into areas of DG that are not in any way connected to this forum. As someone that manages a LOT of people EVERY day, the way I would handle it at work apparantly wouldn't work here. Peer pressure, and warnings with clearly stated consequences are how I deal with problems and "verbal diarreha(sp?)" offenders...

I am having the hardest time understanding why paying a $5 fee to run a classified ad, paid up front by the co-op host ($5 in good faith, which will be returned with the payments of the buyers as part of "overhead") after an interest thread has determined there should be a co-op and from whom they will buy. It's nominal, as Terry said, but a fee for advertising.

THen no one is breaking any rules, and every co-op costs $5 up front to host. The ad could contain the vendor info, what is being offered and the basics of the co-op, followed by a brief summary of the disclaimer to which anyone who wants to participate must click through to, read and accept to be linked to the order thread referred to in that classified ad. Even the folks involved in the interest thread would have to go through that ad to get to the order thread, providing the disclaimer with every co-op. Once the thread is on watch, no need to go through the legal stuff again.

Interest threads could be seen by everyone, but the actual Order and related threads could be viewed only by the final buying group after signing the waiver/legal instrument initially linked from the classified ad (that meets the aup). What am I missing?

Fairy, I think peer pressure works here as well, and when it doesn't, is that person going to be that way only in regard to co-ops, or in any forum s/he interacts in?

4Paws, are you saying you're having a hard time understanding why there is a $5 fee, or why it would be a problem? I think we are all spinning our wheels here over the $5 and I don't think the purchase of a $5 ad is the real issue, even though, if that is commensurate with the cost of a regular advertiser's cost, it would not disadvantage the regular sponsors.

The $5 ad is a way to move the coops out of the forums. The people are supposed to communicate with the vendor by dmail, or on the merchant's site. There would be no chat, which is where the behavior problems arise. There would be no shill, nor any issue of self promotion. Problems would be reported via Garden Watchdog and DG would have a lot less headaches.

I don't think DG realized how much we enjoyed our chat and the fun of the coops and that we would, so adamantly, want them to still offer those options in the Marketplace. In other words, a direct vendor purchase with all of the attendant hoopla of a coop. Or a member bulk purchase, being offered to the membership in the same fashion

It's no wonder that we're not getting much feedback from them here. We've totally convoluted what would have been an much easier solution for them. There's a lot more positive feedback from them on the alternate thread as the posts start to move closer to what they originally envisioned. They made a # of posts on the predecessor thread to this suggesting what they had in mind to replace the coops.

It may be that we still end up having coops but also having a much improved Marketplace. Who knows??? But I think those of us who love coops are doing a great job here to try to make them trouble free.

4Paws and Fairy, you are right. Bad behavior is bad behavior and will show itself to be consistant. But, I do believe that the excitement of a coop lends itself to a lot more of those situations arising and also the ensuing spillage. Some people doggedly have to have the last word, no matter how uncomfortable they make everyone else and it keeps spiraling out of hand.

Peer pressure should have worked at the coop that got really ugly, but didn't. When people spoke up to try to correct the situation, there was so much ugliness and personal attacks, that I think we were all in shock. Well behaved people got silent to try to let it die, rather than feed it, but it took on a life of it's own. This convinced me of the need for a monitor/moderator. With all of the work a host has to do to try to keep up with the orders, expecting them to also police and quell potential trouble is unrealistic in a large coop.