Fixing the co-op forum III continuing the discussion

We came from here http://davesgarden.com/community/forums/t/922686/

The DG co-op forum was closed last week. It has now reopened temporarily.

There seems 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 that these were two major reasons for closing the co-op forum.

Dave has said that he would be willing to reconsider the decision if we could find solutions to these two 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 positve, Dave may 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/922686/

Let's try to keep these discussions as focused as possible, to make it easier for administration and everybody else to follow.

Thanks to everyone!

This post is where I will be summarizing the suggestions for possible solutions to these issues. I will be updating this post daily, so please check it often. There are great and caring minds and hearts at work here! If you feel that I misinterpreted or missed anything, please post it on this thread or send me a Dmail. Thanks, everyone!

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 co-op complaints to a volunteer member group to review and answer appropriately.
4)Have complaints automatically sent to a volunteer "Buffer Group" who filters & resolves the easy ones & forwards the others to Administration. Install a button in the co-op page that leads directly to a Dmail box for the Buffer Group.
5)Create a Disclaimer "Button" that all members have to accept prior to co-op participation.
6)Staff the co-ops with a rotating group of moderator/monitor/stewards to quell potential problems.
7)Standardize and improve the co-op processes and communications, such as spreadsheets and opening informational posts
8)Establish some eligibility criteria for Hosts to ensure well run co-ops
9)Require back up hosts on all co-ops should a need for help arise
10)Apply some visable consequence to errant members such as temporary suspension from co-op participation.
11)Enlist the help of membership to diminish spillover of co-op issues onto other forums. Potential prohibition from co-op participation for persistant violators.
12)Disable, limit or Suspend Dmail capability for abusers
13)Obtain and post each vendor's guaranty and let the member and vendor resolve issues
14)Temporarily close troubled co-ops and while volunteers determine whether to close it permanently.
15) Implementation of a rating icon (stars, thorns) after a host's member ID to apprise members of past performance.
16)Transfer the responsibility for refunds to a third party such as Paypal, Credit Card or Shipping Company.
17)The use of a post co-op survey to inspire overall improvements, allow for feedback rating the host and vendor, affording members an arena for venting.
18)Impose restrictions on the # of participants and offerings per co-op to ensure control. Limit Hosting to one co-op at a time.
19)Organize a volunteer group of experienced co-op hosts as a resource for those wanting to learn co-op hosting.
20)Apply some consequence to those draining DG resources by bringing unwarranted or invalid co-op complaints
21)Create a Co-op Watchdog similar to the Garden Watchdog to air grievances except for Fraud and AUP violations
22)Allow vendor run co-ops and require them to offer guaranties.
23)For guaranty seekers, have hosts offer some co-op items in classifieds at a higher price with guaranties. Provide a link to the ad in the co-op thread.
24)Create an entry in Garden Watchdog for all co-op vendors and hosts.
25)Encourage the use of member vendors to supply all co-ops.
26)Have buyers pay a non-refundable fee to place an order in all co-ops to cover the cost of cancelled orders. Refund or donate any unused fees.
27)Create a permanent thread in the co-op forum that is a co-op buyer's guide. Post a link to the guide in the opening post on both the interest and order threads.
28)Create a permanent thread in the co-op forum that is a Hosting guide.
29) Require hosts to provide a breakdown of co-op costs on the spreadsheet and attach a copy of the payment receipt for the purchase of co-op offerings.
30)include the disclaimer/buyer beware clause IN BOLD in both the interest and ordering threads' opening post.
31) Expand the current feedback system to allow for different or multiple posts between trading and coops.


Vendor Issues


1) Administration enforcement of existing policy by closing co-ops involving suspicion of shilling while matter is investigated.
2)Amend existing policy banning vendor hosting, but require ad purchase or co-op fee.
3)Require a prior period of paid active membership for hosts to prevent the use of shills.
4)Have a volunteer member group review and vett co-op applications.
5)Allow member vendors to host & supply their own co-ops, but charge them a higher membership fee.
6)Assess a co-op fee for vendor hosted co-ops thereby eliminating the need to purchase advertising.
7)After the interest phase is completed require all co-ops to buy an ad and drop the ban on vendor hosting.
8)Move the coops to one of the Marketing arenas, while maintaining the existing format, still restricting them to paid members but with different AUP and grievance protocols
9)Redefine Vendor.
10)Create a sticky posted eligible vendor list comprised of ad purchasers and vendors who pay fees to get and stay on the list. For deeply discounted co-op offerings, permit hosts to pay fee or buy ad and pass cost along to buyers
11)Impose co-op fees only on non-affilliated vendors.
12)Require membership or advertising purchases of all co-op vendors.
13)Make co-op fees equal to the cost of membership or regular advertising.
14)Permit vendor hosted co-ops, but only in one of the marketing arenas.
15)Open all co-op interest threads with an open invitation to all vendors to reply via Dmail.
16)Assign a vendor icon along with vendor's member user ID
17)Create 2 categories of membership for vendors. Assign vendor icon to those who want to market on DG and charge them a higher membership fee.
18)Create a list of member vendors with profiles that include offerings with links to their Dmail and websites.
19)Divide Classifieds into sections such as Professional Vendors, home gardener's plants, vendor hosted co-ops and non-gardening items.
20)Forward all prospective non-affiliated co-op sponsors to DG to purchase memberships, classifieds or subscription ads.
21)Have concerned shoppers to monitor all co-op interest threads to help steer supply opportunities to member vendors.
22)Encourage members, NOT VENDORS, to post alerts in the forum threads when they spot attractive ads or vendor hosted co-ops in the classifieds.



This message was edited Nov 16, 2008 2:00 AM

This message was edited Nov 16, 2008 2:19 AM

This message was edited Nov 16, 2008 2:32 AM

This message was edited Nov 16, 2008 3:25 AM

This message was edited Nov 16, 2008 3:39 AM

This message was edited Nov 16, 2008 4:03 AM

This message was edited Nov 16, 2008 7:01 PM

This message was edited Nov 16, 2008 7:03 PM

This message was edited Nov 17, 2008 9:12 AM

Thanks for the new thread. Was hopign that if i tried to load it would have anew one.

good job Storm..... I know that was alot of work for you, but so much nicer. Lot sand lots of suggestions. Maybe now a tiem to really start delteltign those that have to many potential problems for Dave and parties involved and keep condensing down.

I cna see Dave makign oen or two change s if his computer system allows it, but he and th eteam spent along time puttign the orginal AUP together and if we do elminatiosn gona fidn we aren;'t left with but maybe one or two things other than what Dave has.

Every change is a major , major upheaval for him to add on or redo. It just not one section that the changes have to be made in, he ha sto insure that those links work for all the forums and Dg as a whole. Toomuch work, need a coupel of real easy simpel ideas that sums up all the above collectively.

Thank you to Buried Treasures for getting us all on the same page!

You are correct Starlight. Too many programming changes and changes that would have adverse effects on other aspects of DG are going to slow down or maybe eliminate fixing the co-ops all together.

I am still lurking....

Even if co-ops end up getting moved to the Marketing arena, I believe that it would be beneficial to have permanent buyer's and host's guides there. The same for spreadsheet templates.

If we could get some assurance from DG that co-ops will be continued in some form, then volunteers could begin working on these. Even if they would need amending to suit the new format, I'm sure that most of the information would still be pertinent.

I don't think that we wil get a total confirmation that they will always be there. While the new system maybe an improvement, there is always goign to be somebody who makes some very srious major mistakes and Dave has the right to have these escape clauses to pull them if he gets tired of the hassles and hedaches.

Stickies and templates are good, helps remove some problems and adds a bit of uniformity. Lot sof computer challened people, myself included who would need very simple, easy to understand and do spreadsheets.

I'm thinking if a majority of DG members interested in coops can agree on a coop fee and movement to Marketplace we can delete several suggestions from both lists. The fee would eliminate the possibility of shilling and provide a means to level the coop playing field so that whomever decides to host a coop pays the same fee as a vendor pays to advertise. The host is acting as a vendor (providing a product for purchase) and should pay the same fee as one.

Admin may set aside the fees in a refund/charity account if they so choose. We must remember that even if Admin so chooses the owner has final say so of where revenue is spent.

Gary

I think that actually what we were saying was that if we did move them Classifieds would be the place-1 $5 fee versus a % fee that would far outweigh the $5 classifieds fee.....but again, admin will have to decide what is best for the site as a whole

Classified is fine. My main point is to begin jelling our ideas and start looking toward closure rather than continuing to expand discussion in all areas. We can easily discuss this for six months but Admin is still working with the same rules they found inadequate and chose to shut coops down.

That is what I said in the last thread. Work on the disclaimer button, the guidelines for hosts and the guidelines for participants. These need to be short and concise. The host guidelines ideally would be written by folks who have successfully hosted several co-ops in the past. The disclaimer button should be easy to come up with as such things are in common usage. As far as guidelines for participants that should be a fairly "common sense" thing as well. The only real sticky part as far as I can see is dispute resolution. Problably most can just be redirected to the original disclaimer button but a very small percentage would be real problems that need to be addressed. That is where we have to have a back up plan so that admin does not get a lot of emails that waste their time. Are we still planning on having a board of some kind to resolve these issues?

I am sure that Admin is looking at our ideas and what could work and what wouldn't and trying to figure out if this is fixable-not a small job....I am just glad they were willing to work with us...

If memory serves, Admin had two basic complaints. Shilling and free advertising covers one area and a means to nearly eliminate complaints they receive are the main problems Admin hope to have resolved.

Full disclosure of income/expenses by hosts, standardized spreadsheets, and tutoring are grand ideas but don't directly fall into the problem categories mentioned by Admin. Let's take care of Admin's complaints first and implement the rest of the good ideas after they are deemed workable, by us and Admin.

You are right, but I think the reason we were talking about trying to streamline things was to help eliminate some of those complaints.....more info=more education=people knowing more what to expect=hopefully less complaints....I think inherantly there will always be those that need that drama, and that is where repercusions come in or something of the sort....and I think peer regulating will help-if someone is a problem in a co-op, odds are it will happen again or has happened before....which means for me, they wouldn't be welcome to order-privately through dmail of course, but hosting a co-op is not easy and we don't need anyone making it harder....I am of course speaking of non valid complaints..

GK, Those ideas do fall under Admin's requests, because they asked us to think of ways to prevent complaints. Well run co-ops will help with this.

Interestingly, we don't know anything about how many and what the resolution process is for complaints that arise over classified items. DG does not completely wash their hands of these because of several comments that are posted in the classified rules.

I was searching through the co-op forum for old threads that give hosting guidlines and instructions. There is not one thread that has a title using Co-op hosting. I did read several that had some good recommendations, all by experienced hosts. They were several threads requesting help with hosting, but not many replies to those.

If we can get a confirmation that co-ops or group purchases with a co-op like format will be continued, then we can ask for volunteers of experienced hosts to start working on the guide.

As a shopper, I watched the active co-ops before joining in one to get the lay of the land. Even after that, there were uncertainties for me while participating. There were many variables in the processes from co-op to co-op, especially among important items like when and how and where to send payment & find out how much was owed. Even with spreadsheets, some hosts sent invoices to our personal emails. There is a need for at least a brief guide for co-op shoppers. Just peruse any co-op thread and you'll see why.

#1 fir shoppers-READ THE ENTIRE 1st POST BEFORE ORDERING!!LOL

gk, remember that Terry said that the prohibitions against vendor hosted co-ops were not only to inhibit self promotion, but also to prevent them from using the co-ops to shop for cheap plants to resell for profit.

To prevent this, even in the classifieds, there would have to be a rule that Vendors can not purchase items in a co-op. Is this presently a rule? If not, how do they know if this is happening now?

Tetley, many members have volunteered to serve on a grievance resolution or buffer committee, but the administration seems to be uncomfortable with this.

This whole thing makes my head hurt, forget it, Dave has said No !
Lets get on with our life's.

Fairy, not everybody puts all of the information that they should in the first post.

How many times have we had to go back and search through a thread for a link to the spreadsheet or the email address for Paypal?

I'm starting to think like you, rentman. Every door we open leads to another problem. The ethical positions block every solution.

I don't subscribe to DG to get bargains on garden related products. I joined to learn how to best use/display and take care of the products I obtain.

Under the present rules, are members who are also vendors, permitted to shop in co-ops?

If not, how does the host know if that member is also a vendor?

If so, how does the Admin know if the purchases are for personal use or resale?

While I do share in your frustration, gk as we try to sort this out, may I remind all viewers that this thread is for positive constructive posts only.

Stormy-you are right-I myself have forgotten to put a link in the first post to th SS and such....
And yes, positive constructive posts please....

I have been reading these threads and it seems the common thing is that not everyone is reading the posts. I think that is the case in the COOP forum. I think the disclaimer plus the fact that the host is volunteering his/her time should be at the top of the forum. Stickies for hosts and buyers would be helpful. I think the host of a coop needs to post the "disclaimer" often. The fact that you shouldn't order more than you can afford to lose needs to be a reminder also. I think people get going on a coop and forget that there are things that may happen that are out of the host's hands.

The disclaimer button is a great idea but the buyers need to be reminded more often.
Maybe a FAQ sticky would be a good start for beginners.

Vendors are free to purchase in co-ops. I don't think whether it's for personal use or resale matters. When we were smaller, I couldn't always meet minimum orders, so I would use co-ops to purchase in smaller quantities, but still at a close to wholesale price.

Before this whole discussion began, I placed a classified ad for mmy Dad's company while I was still working there. Because it was a wholesale transaction, the minimums were quite high, but very doable in a co-op. When I placed the ad, I didn't solicit for a co-op, but I knew the ad itself would most likely lead to one, and it did.

with that in mind, I think vendors placing the ad with what's available, with the price based on quantity. some vendors would never do this, and I think in that case, the potential host should be the one to pay for the classified.

As an example, if I needed to move some Euphorbia, there's nothing against the current rules of me placing a classified ad offering 50% off of such and such varieties, based on an order of 25 or more per variety. It wouldn't generate much, if any interest for individual buyers, but I can by current rules place an ad like that, knowing that it will most likely lead to interest if not an actual co-op.

I doubt Agri-Starts, or any of the other true wholesale suppliers would do that, but if there's someone that wants to organize a co-o fr those vendors, the host would place the ad, with prices, variety, etc.

Chris

Thanks for your imput, elsie! There is merit to your suggestions. I remember 1Anjl, in the Iris Co-op several times mentioning that the plants might appear to be distressed upon arrival. I hope that this prevented unrealistic expectations and complaints.

Unfortunately in co-ops, as in retail stores, there are always those who think that rules and disclaimers don't apply to them and still expect refunds. Certain people are just not good candidates for co-op participation. They forget about or don't understand about the "cooperative" in co-ops.

I still think it would be interesting to find what complaints the Admin gets from classifieds as well as how those are handled. I doubt that there are anywhere near the number of purchases there that there have been in co-ops.

This message was edited Nov 16, 2008 3:09 PM

Buried treasures, one of the questions that Terry asked me when I questioned her about the rules against vendor hosting was how would we know if the vendor wasn't piggy backing their own order onto the co-op to restock their inventory. So apparently it does matter to DG. Maybe they don't have a rule against it, but frown upon it and want to limit the opportunities for it. The scenario you mention is exactly why I've been able to get so many great buys on Ebay.

Good for you to get co-ops from the classifieds! I'll keep an eye out for your Euphorbias!!!!!!

In reading the above summary (in second post) I noticed that you didnt list the option of the co-op host posting in bold at the very top of their post the disclaimer

I really like the idea of the Disclaimer Button.....You would have to hit the disclaimer button each time before you participated in a coop acknowldging that you are in this at your own risk, your own expense, and holding no one responsible for what happens. If you file a complaint with the administration at Dave's Garden you would be removed from the site and therefore banned from ever participating in the Dave's Garden Site again.

Sounds tough, but it might make you think twice before participating in a coop.

I really would like for the coops to make it, as my gardens would be no where without the coops.

Deb

i was just trying to think of ways to prevent lots of programming work for Dave ...that all :o)

On the other hand, I have had really bad luck with a couple of co-ops supplied by member vendors. One was just very disorganized, oversold, and sent some small, poor quality plants trying to fill orders. At least she was growing her own. The other routinely resells end-of-the-season plants that arrive dried up, often beginning to rot.

If absolutely no complaints are allowed, are we not opening the door for more of the same? I did not complain to DG about either of these since I ordered at my own risk, and I understand what that means.

A vendor's feedback does not tell the whole story as in a co-op, only the host is to leave feedback. I believe that is why some vendors like to use friends to host instead of selling through the classifieds: no negative feedback, regardless of the quality of the plants.

When it comes to coops we have been allowed to leave feedback for the host and the participant - and we still can - yes? Put this at the top of the forum?

1Anjl, Thanks, I have added your suggestion.

Patrob, was it evident during the interest and ordering phase that the co-op was disorganized and oversold? If so, this is where the co-op mentor or moderator would be helpful and the use of a spreadsheet to keep track of the inventory and orders would prevent the overselling.

This is where the use of a Co-op Watchdog would be good. Members could rate both the host and the vendor. I can see why no one but the host is supposed to leave feedback for the vendor in the regular feedback system. Problems that are caused by the host should not be included in the Garden Watchdog.

A co-op is not only a cooperative effort between the members and the host. It is also a cooperative effort between the host and the vendor. The efforts between the members and the host are in a large part visable on the co-op threads.

Members have no insight into the efforts between the host and vendor to be able to distinguish responsibilty for poor items. A Co-op watchdog would reveal those issues and allow members to form their own conclusions.

Debsroots, not all co-op complaints are about bad plants or disorganized hosts or vendors and there are instances where the administration is going to want to see and address some of the other problems. This is where a member screening group would be helpful.

If enough co-op improvements are put in place, the complaints should diminish to the point where the administration would find the ones that are received are manageable.

if there is a feedback system (like the stars and horns) I think it needs to remain anonymous as to who left the feedback.

as I stated earlier, I took the time to go back thru all the co-ops this past year, and there was negative feedback for only 4 of the 54ish hostesses. I cant imagine with all the complaints Admin received, that all these co-ops were A-one..... I think the issue with leaving negative feedback is that hostesses 'DG friends' get involved and harrass whoever left the feedback.

If its anonymous, and valid. (maybe decided by monitoring group you are all talking about) then people would be more apt to leave negative feedback.

then we can keep the feedback that is currently in place for trades, etc. I may not want to do a co-op with someone again...due to unorganization....but I may want to still trade with them...etc.

the other bug I noticed in our current feedback system is once you have left feedback (wonderful trader 4/14/08) when you go to leave feedback on a co-op that is held months later.... it still shows the old 4/14/08 date....you cant currently leave positive feedback for one experience, and then later leave positive or negative experience for another transaction....

1Anjl, that's an interesting observation about the feedback system. I wonder if it could be tweaked?

I don't think any feedback should be anonymous. If there is harrassment about feedback - that should be a great reason not to host a coop again. I would think the feedback system is the best place to check on the host and participants of a coop.

1Anjl, Ebay just recently removed the seller's ability to reply to feedback. Apparently they were having similar problems.

In the present feedback system, can a member leave more than one comment per member?

You make an important distinction 1Anjl. A member may be a great seed trader, but not a good co-op host. All the more reason for co-ops to have their own rating sytem.

I want to add a suggestion for improving the feedback system, but need to understand it's limitations to properly form the suggestion.

At some point we may split out marketplace vs. co-op vs. trading feedback, but for the time being, I would assume the current feedback will be the only feedback system in place.