Hi guys, We are reviewing/revising the policy on merchant forum access as we speak. The original policy may be overly broad. I think we can get much closer to our original intent with a more narrowly focused policy. Please give us a day or two to get this right. Tim

I think we can get much closer to our original intent with a more narrowly focused policy. Now I wonder what the original intent really was.

thats good news tim tho I would also suggest a specfic merchants contract as well the claim that this site can change the terms at will with out the brokee having a say is worring to say the least.. at this time, while I've been considering becoming a merchant, I would stay away from here under those conditions. Kai

you should have given it a day or two in the first place before implimenting such a drastic measure. What exactly is your goal here? What is this "bigger picture" you are trying for? A clear cut missive would foster a sense of harmony, cooperation and perhaps even accelerate the rate at which you acheive your goals, if you would share them. We really are not as stupid as some would like to think. A lot of this contention can be eased with a bit of forethought and explanation. What exactly is the missive of this site? it's long term and short term goals? How are they to be achieved?

Kaibach You may actually be better off at a smaller brokerage. With "700+" merchants here- it would be hard for one to find your items. The smaller brokerages also offer better percentage breaks to the creating artists. Just use the Product forum to advertise your wares and provide a link to all the other brokerages you would sell at. shrug just a thought*

Tim, Good to hear. Hopefully the revision will be one that all merchants and the site can deal with - something mutually beneficial and not exclusively prejudicial.

Cheryle, Our primary goal is for the Merchants Forum to be a productive place where real business issues can be discussed, and resolved in a positive, respectful manner. Renderosity spends a great deal of money providing this site and it's resources to the members at no charge. It's only means of livelihood comes from operating the marketplace. There have been members who would undermine the marketplace to advance their own goals. There's nothing inherently wrong with that. We simply prefer not having to spar with those folks in the merchants forum where we are attempting to advance the business aspect of this site to the benefit of the merchants, ourselves, and the members of the community. It seems that our initial policy may have been overly broad so we are reconsidering it. Tim

"Hi guys, We are reviewing/revising the policy on merchant forum access as we speak. The original policy may be overly broad. I think we can get much closer to our original intent with a more narrowly focused policy. Please give us a day or two to get this right. Tim" When you run it through the Meaningless Doublespeak- to- English translator, it reads as: "Hi, guys! .... Tim" In what way is the policy being reviewed/revised? In what way is the original policy overly broad? What was the original intent? And while you are here, what about the implementation of a standard, legally binding contract to ensure that this sort of pseudo-business doesn't keep happening? What about a brief personal apology for all those parties, something to give the impression that the PTB give a rat's ass, instead of this nonsense that could have come from a Portable Excuse Generator?

Michelleh, Your post seems to come from a dark place. How can you dislike me so much when you don't even know me? Tim

Tim she asks some valid questions. "what about the implementation of a standard, legally binding contract to ensure that this sort of pseudo-business doesn't keep happening?" I do not see any personal hostility towards you in that post- i see frustration with the double speak, the excuses, the non-answers.

Renderosity spends a great deal of money providing this site and it's resources to the members at no charge. It's only means of livelihood comes from operating the marketplace. There have been members who would undermine the marketplace to advance their own goals. There's nothing inherently wrong with that. We simply prefer not having to spar with those folks in the merchants forum where we are attempting to advance the business aspect of this site to the benefit of the merchants, ourselves, and the members of the community." Private club? Members only? Fine, but that doesn't address the issue of refusing to provide a standard merchant contract or address the issues raised about enforcing powerless restrictions due to their unenforcibility. I should know better. It just hurts me to see this dance. The people who do the most and ask the least (simple explanations and fair treatment) get hurt the worst. Now the excluding factor is 'undermining the MP to advance their own goals', which leaves the door wide open to arbitrary exclusion. Next will be 'anyone who undermines the site to advance their own goals'.

I don't dislike you, Tim. I don't think you see how these tiny little bursts of communication give people the impression that they are being stalled off and ignored. I don't think yu realise how many people are very upset and dissilusioned. I still care about tis place, because of the peopel here. I just hate seing these kind of thigns, which mainly get out of control because it took you how long, almost a week? to address the issue. Don't do that. It only hurts everyone.

Michelleh, Why would you not want Renderosity to have a productive forum for advancing it's business operations? Do you not benefit from the site and the resources it provides? Maybe there's something here I'm missing ... Tim

you are missing something- nowhere in those posts was anything saying that a forum for advancing business operations would not be welcome- the fact is- it has been suggested severakl times in several different threads, yet it has not been implimented. Rather- merchants have been shut out. All micheleh asked is "In what way is the policy being reviewed/revised? In what way is the original policy overly broad? What was the original intent? ... what about the implementation of a standard, legally binding contract ...?"

Tim, it's good to hear that you are reconsidering your policies. I would also consider a merchant contract as has been previously suggested. Many of the people banned from the Merchant Forum have been helpful to other brokered artists and you not only do them, but all your current artists a disservice by banning them. Renderosity has always been about information sharing on all levels, it's why I initially joined. If there are site senstive discussions that you don't want other sites to have access to, why not instead set up a forum for your exclusive brokered artists as others have suggested?

While you're at it Tim, discuss actually having a merchant contract that can't be changed on a whim. People have brought up some very good points regarding this. Right now the "agreement" (or true lack of that Jeff keeps mentioning) is worded in such a way that favors you to be twisted to fit any situation. And it has been.
These criticisms and suggestions are born out of frustration and are not personal. Other sites have contracts and do not alter agreements in a matter of hours. It's the right thing to do and I hope you consider it because it's time. If you refuse your merchants some security, you're going to lose some and it won't look good for you.

I think the notion of a more formal merchant policy and associated Terms is reasonable. Usually, these specify the terms under which they can be revised, 30 day notice, etc. Not sure about the logistics of a signed contract for each new merchant that uploads a product to the marketplace. We have a much higher volume there than folks like DAZ, etc. I don't want to get into the specifics of the Merchant Forum access policy until we have discussed completely within the admin team. If I did, you guys would nail me for asking for discussion and then not listening. :o) Tim

Michelleh, Why would you not want Renderosity to have a productive forum for advancing it's business operations? Do you not benefit from the site and the resources it provides? Maybe there's something here I'm missing ... Tim I never said that. Why do you think I came up with the idea to have a marketplace segment on the magazine cd? That was my idea, btw. Does this show that I don't want the MP to be successful? I don't think so. I just want these nice people to get their clear answers, for chrissake.

"Our primary goal is for the Merchants Forum to be a productive place where real business issues can be discussed, and resolved in a positive, respectful manner" How is this to be achieved? Certainly not by shutting out freelancing multi brokering artists-and their loyal customers. What specific legal steps are in place or will be in place to protect all involved? " It's only means of livelihood comes from operating the marketplace." Oh? the magazine is not making money? lets see a 64 pg magazine costs about $4,000 to print for 5,000 copies approximately, they are getting $3,840 of FREE graphics time from the volenteers of the magazine (that is a tad below scale), they are selling it for $8 an issue, and it is not making money for this site? if it is not- then good business policy would dictate that it is time to shut it down and cut costs to increase profit margin Good business policy would also dictate- don't kick out producing vendors- impliment a Rosity exclusive forum on top of the reg merchant forum. Business policy would also dictate that 700 + merchants is a tad top heavy- not all of them are selling- impliment a " if x amount of sales are not reached within x amount of time- we can no longer furnish you a market place spot." Good business would also dictate a legally binding contract that cannot be changed at whim protecting both the site and the merchants.

"Not sure about the logistics of a signed contract for each new merchant that uploads a product to the marketplace. We have a much higher volume there than folks like DAZ, etc." Lol! So does Sprint. Wanna buy a phone service plan without a contract? Anyone who engages in a business transaction involving expectations of performance and planned revenue generation must have a mutually agreed upon statement of business process and accountability- a contract. Otherwise it is an informal private agreement, and not subject to actual enforcement of regualtion on either party's part.

Excellent points on all counts, Cheryle, btw. 8)

"Our primary goal is for the Merchants Forum to be a productive place where real business issues can be discussed, and resolved in a positive, respectful manner" Tim, I would really like you to point out where/when I was ever truly disrespectful in a post in the Merchant's Forum. I rarely posted there. When I did post, it was usually in response to a request for feedback. No, my posts were not always positive, if your definition of positive means agreeing with Renderosity. If all you want is agreement, then why ask at all. That does nothing for you except possibly make you THINK you are doing the right thing. But give me some credit here, I have as much or more experience running an online store as anyone here. And I have been selling my own products for quite some time. My opinions just might be valid. Your assumption that my criticisms were only voiced to further my own agenda is just that. Your assumption. If my only reason for selling at Renderosity was to gain access to your big secrets or use the merchant's forum as a soapbox, I would have stuck with one item in your store and spent much more of my time posting there. It's way too much trouble to put a lot of things into a store if you aren't going to try to ensure that they sell.

Tim, Forgive me for my ignorance, but didn't the first installment happen way before the new year? Therefore, you and your admins/mods have had plenty of time to discuss any changes, IMHO. This reeks of another snow job to try to placate the masses until another asinine policy change can be put into place, merely by the contempt displayed in your posts.

Again we find ourselves across the table at odds with one another Tim... I particularly have a problem with your statement which said: "There have been members who would undermine the marketplace to advance their own goals." I most certainly would hope that you are not implying that Diane, Ironbear or myself are out to destroy, or in your words, undermine your store. In our times as Merchants here, we have provided insight when situations or changes were proposed. We'd done so honestly without any animosity or with intentions towards undermining the merchants or your MarketPlace. In fact, there have been numerous times where we've contacted you to inform you of individual who have placed fraudulent CC purchases in our stores, in order so that you can be on the look out for those individuals in yours. We've even brought to the table (in your merchant forum) our experience with our own online stores and have tried to help you avoid making some of the same mistakes we've made ourselves. As Merchants, we are entitled to the same treatment as any other merchant you sell for, regardless of our own endeavors elsewhere. We don't lock out vendors who are admins or mods for Renderosity in our own Vender Forums and we allow them to have the same voice as our other vendors. We do that, because it is the right thing to do and the Community benefits from that sort of involvement. It was stated once that at Renderosity the ART matters. When truly it isn't and shouldn't be the ART that matters, it should be these ARTISTS that matter. Sure, you want to prosper and grow this website and the Community that visits it... but damnit, how can that occur when members at this website aren't treated fairly or equally? This BS of US vs. THEM has got to end and Tim, your decision of "locking" certain people out, people that are helping to contribute money and product to this site, for it's growth, it's membership, it's survival only helps to increase and strengthen those rifts. Renderosity IS the FLAGSHIP of this Community and it really needs to start having a direction and a captain who can guide it through the rough waters and storms. For too long now, it has seemed to be lacking in that and drifting this way and that, where-ever the wind may blow it... take the helm, or give it to someone who can man that helm for you... because as it stands right now, you are helping to make the other sites appealing to the very people you want to service. Truthfully, Jack

I surely would be surprised if he hear you, Jack...

"Renderosity IS the FLAGSHIP of this Community and it really needs to start having a direction and a captain who can guide it through the rough waters and storms." And a standardized, legal brokerage contract, a set guideline, and open and honest accountability of pracitces.

"Ironbear - FYI!!! I did a search through the database just to address your slight distortion of the issue that it is common knowledge that those of us at RR know you are a store admin at DSi. You signed one forum post, out of the 14 + thousand you have made, as DSi Store Admin previous to your removal from the Private Merchants Forum. Now tell me how easily it would have been to not catch that?" Let's see... I think you missed a couple, Tommy. You also missed a few IM exchnges with JeffH and ClintH [No probs, so did they even when it was spelled out to them]. Known to other admins such as Audre, in phone conversation. You also didn't check private chats here with Tammymc and Tim, nor emails between me and them - also understandable, I wouldn't let you access my mail if I were either of them. ;] The knowledge of what I was doing after I left here was made clear to all of the people who matter - of which you're not one. Sorry you didn't get the memos. As far as: "I'm not here to continue the argument -", you're right, you're not. Since you're neither merchant, site owner, nor store admin, you've got nothing to add in continuation that's worth the hot air behind it. ;] On: " just displaying a more accurate description of your misleading statement." - Nice try, but I kinda doubt you could display a more accurate picture if one was stapled to your forehead with a neon sign floating above it.

Tim? "Hi guys, We are reviewing/revising the policy on merchant forum access as we speak. The original policy may be overly broad. I think we can get much closer to our original intent with a more narrowly focused policy. Please give us a day or two to get this right. Tim " You had since October when you first implemented this over the objections of virtually all of the merchants in the thread where you asked for "input" on it - input you ignored. You probably had no intent of paying attention to the input when you asked for it, but that's unproveable so we'll let it go for now. You had ample time to design a sound policy before you implemented this one, time that no one here evidentally spent doing so. Why should anyone here belive you in that "a day or two to get this right" is going to make any difference? If you'd taken the time to get it right and pinpoint you're origional intent and communicate it properly, you wouldn't be in this situation now.

"If I did, you guys would nail me for asking for discussion and then not listening. :o)" Heh heh. We're still doing that from the first time you did it, Tim. What would be the difference? ;]

Jack, Oddly, I agree with much of what you say. The last year has been hard for me personally. Lost a sister to lung cancer in September after a year long bout. Spent the last few months taking care of her family and affairs. Tammy broke her ankle in 3 places in October and been trying to get her back up to speed. On top of that Renderosity has been a second job for for a while as some of you know. The good news is time heals most things. Personally, I plan to transition most of my time to Bondware/Renderosity over the next couple of months. Not sure it will fix all the woes you out-lined, but at least there should be a more obvious target if folks are unhappy. :) Tim

Nice post, Tim. That approach worked well for Steve Cooper. ;]

Tim, sorry to hear about your sister. and I hope Tammy's up to speed now. Things do get crazy and I do hope you will take the time to seriously look at what's been upsetting people here. But are you SURE you want that target on your back? :-)

Not sure how you mean that IB, but I will assume the best possible interpretation.

So- in these proposed changes- are you going to invite barred vendors back and just make a new forum for exclusives? And set up legal contracts? Just curious...

Cheryle, I think all those things are possible although I can't commit to them specifically yet. There is one exception among the ex-vendors that probably would not be allowed back into the Merchant Forum. Even that merchant is welcome to be a member and can sell here if they like. Tim

Who, IB? (Don't say it out loud if you aren't prepared to tell.)

Tim, I can understand and appreciate the situation that you've found yourself in the last year. Truth be told, I think it has been hard on everyone in this Community, myself included, but still we trudge on and try to make the best of our situations as possible. The biggest problem that I see occuring now, is that your actions are going to be under a microscope and hopefully, your prepared with the fact that you will have to earn a measure of trust earned from a lot of the Community. For too long now, things have been ignored or left untended to, or plea's unheard or unresponded too. Many people know your the man behind the show, but you're rarely seen or heard from. This Community is used to seeing the operators of the Community sites that they visit being in the trenches with them... and ever since I've left my post here... you've not been around. All of us, myself included, make mistakes while operating these sites and as the owners and operators of our sites it is our job to take the flak, to wear the targets for the Community to pitch their bitch at. That's the role you assumed for yourself when you took over operations here, and no offense, it is long past time that you fill that role. You are the end of the line, the last word, you have the final decision... don't make your admins and moderators the ones to answer to your choices. Right or wrong, you are accountable... not them. Understand, I am not saying this out of animosity, I am saying this because this site needs a leader. It needs someone to make a final judgement call. It needs someone who has a clear direction, a mission and goal in mind and the balls to get into the trenches to make it happen or someone who can take the flak when shit goes sour. We need to get away from seeing the moderators rules and statements conflicting with each other publicly because they are without solid guidance. In short, you may be the biggest site right now by way of traffic and numbers... but your also the site with the most misdirection and faulty operation. You want this to be a successful business, sir, then start treating it like one and give it the attention it requires to be so. Truthfully, Jack

Attached Link: 12. Re: CL. Courtesy Status Report Please by kupa on 9/13/02 12:40

Since I know you don't read your own forums much, post #12 is the one you want for refference. Sorry about your personal dificulties Tim - but that strikes me as the same sort of "sorry, we had to shaft our customers/members because... " sympathy post that Cooper made there at the start of his fiasco hitting the fan. Doesn't surprise me... you and he share business ethics, which I felt made Renderosity and CuriousLabs partners that were made for each other. Place whatever interpretation on that that you wish to. Sorry that you and Tamy have been having hard times, honestly - but since you are trying to run a business this size, the responsibility for how it's run ends with you, wether you're distracted at the time or not. And you get to eat the flack for whatever bad decisions you make and the excution of them. Which is ok, really - I didn't believe either your first posts on this topic back in October nor your "Big Picture" announcement. I'm sure whatever bit of PR fluff you come up with to try and smooth this over will be just as sincere... and it'll have just as much veracity behind it as those two did.

Jack D Kamm... wrote "it is our job to take the flak," You are not taking me anywhere, Jack!!!! Or you Tim..... God knows what my wife would think ;)

heh... sorry flak... didn't mean you per se... :o) Jack

I'm just glad IB spelt it as "flack" in his message after yours lol

Ooops... sorry Flak. I hope Tim doesn't eat you - that'd be horrid. ;]

yeah.... :/

Tim in one of your posts you said you were looking over the policy and that it may have been too broad. Then you state you may reinstate the merchants forum privlages to all but one merchant. Correct? This sounds like your policy was too broad but for ONE MERCHANT! Was all of this just an attempt to remove one merchant from the forum? Could this be a personal grudge you have against someone? If not, you may want to reword your posts, because thats exactly what it sounds like.

I was thinking that too Spiritbro, i was also thinking- they better have a guideline of what's acceptable behavior and what is unacceptable in the merchant's forum that can be applied to ALL who utilize it. Then comes the hard part- enacting it fairly, honestly and across the board no matter what or who is involved.

There is one exception among the ex-vendors that probably would not be allowed back into the Merchant Forum. Even that merchant is welcome to be a member and can sell here if they like. This statement has me stumped as well..Does this refer to ONE merchant, or does this mean that those (all) who were previously locked out of the Merchants Forum..still to be locked out? If it means just one is to be permanently locked out, but is still welcome to sell here... that's going to go over like a lead balloon.. This sounds like discrimination based on personal feelings.. {UGH!} I hate to think of whom that one merchant is..and how this statement is going to affect others.. ~Jani

Uh, Tim, that one merchant statement? Not a good idea, bud, as it reinforces the idea that if someone crosses the PTB, the PTB -- regardless of the contract -- will throw the merchant out on whatever premise they can find. It's all or nothin'. Don't set a precedent you're not prepared to keep.

Told you. Don't air your dirty laundry if you don't want people to go "what's that smell?" Now is there going to be some actual communication and acknowledgement of the valid concerns raised?

If you're trying to be fair that's not the way to go about it. Because we all know who you're refering to and the circumstances wouldn't be any different from anyone else who would be allowed back.

If you do this, it will prove that you operate on personal opinion rather than true professionalism. Think about this long and hard.

Ok, After reading my own post, I admit I need to remove the second paragraph >>Does this refer to ONE merchant, or does this mean that those (all) who were previously locked out of the Merchants Forum..still to be locked out?<< sigh, Im tired And yeah Kendra, I agree..I think we all know who is being spoken of here.. and it isnt fair to that merchant.. :| {Why do I get the destinct impression that this thread is going to turn ugly?} ~goes to bed wondering what new developments will unfold before the morn.~ Night all :) ~Jani :)