registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,624 
Likes: 6,437
|
Post by registerme on Oct 9, 2017 22:38:00 GMT
Yeah that would be a good option. We did create a proforma SLA (service level agreement) for the provision of a private board (as per AC) a couple of years ago and made the platforms aware of it, but none took us up on the offer - it is a bit of a hassle for the platforms in verifying users. The offer to platforms stands, I can supply platforms reps with a copy of the proforma SLA as a starting point for further discussions on request. The complaint that a certain platform made last month to the FCA about the moderation of this forum being far too lax is still working its way through due process (I have a copy of the formal complaint so it wasn't a bluff by the platform). Separate to that the same platform is I believe going to make further noises elsewhere about this. A potential very long term outcome of this agitation MIGHT be an industry funded KYC prequisite check for membership of a new p2p forum. However, as commented up thread, the probability is individual loan selection will have disappeared as an option long before such an approach could be formalised. (Personally I'd ignore this paragraph, its not worth serious consideration IMO at this stage). Do I take it the complaint being investigated by the FCA relates to one of your private forums? Equating a complaint with something being investigated is perhaps reading too much into this. Anyway, no, the complaint doesn't concern "our private forums". It doesn't even mention them (there are two "private" forums, one for mods, and one for admins. See here for more colour). For the record I would love there to be an FCA audit of these forums and / or our "private forums", whether generally or specifically with regard to the "complaint" being discussed. I am not convinced that the "complainant" would necessarily view things the same way. EDIT: In spite of the strain staff are currently experiencing there are a good few of us, most of whom have never met in person (for the record the one and only time I met mrclondon, bracknellboy and paul123 was at the drinks organised by arbster last Christmas, I have met none of the others, and we don't use Skype, Teamspeak, Discord or even phones to keep in touch - it's all here, it's all a matter of record, it's all auditable). Additionally there have been other staff who have done a stint and then resigned, in addition to the two staff who recently resigned. To the best of my knowledge not one has ever commented about staff doing anything other than trying to keep the forum on an even keel, let alone suggested that something more nefarious might be taking place. To suggest otherwise doesn't annoy me, it just amuses me  . But again, I would welcome an audit.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on Oct 9, 2017 22:42:47 GMT
Yeah that would be a good option. We did create a proforma SLA (service level agreement) for the provision of a private board (as per AC) a couple of years ago and made the platforms aware of it, but none took us up on the offer - it is a bit of a hassle for the platforms in verifying users. The offer to platforms stands, I can supply platforms reps with a copy of the proforma SLA as a starting point for further discussions on request. The complaint that a certain platform made last month to the FCA about the moderation of this forum being far too lax is still working its way through due process (I have a copy of the formal complaint so it wasn't a bluff by the platform). Separate to that the same platform is I believe going to make further noises elsewhere about this. A potential very long term outcome of this agitation MIGHT be an industry funded KYC prequisite check for membership of a new p2p forum. However, as commented up thread, the probability is individual loan selection will have disappeared as an option long before such an approach could be formalised. (Personally I'd ignore this paragraph, its not worth serious consideration IMO at this stage). Do I take it the complaint being investigated by the FCA relates to one of your private forums? No, about the moderation of the forum as a whole. Nothing to do with private forums. I only mentioned it here by way of contextual introduction to the point I actually wanted to make about a KYC forum door being a possible end point of that platforms efforts. EDIT: Crossed with registerme . And to echo his point, to assume the complaint is being "investigated" is an assumption too far this point. Hence my comment, best ignore.
|
|
stub8535
Member of DD Central
personal opinions only. Not qualified to advise on investment products.
Posts: 1,447
Likes: 945
|
Post by stub8535 on Oct 9, 2017 23:08:53 GMT
Do I take it the complaint being investigated by the FCA relates to one of your private forums? No, about the moderation of the forum as a whole. Nothing to do with private forums. I only mentioned it here by way of contextual introduction to the point I actually wanted to make about a KYC forum door being a possible end point of that platforms efforts. EDIT: Crossed with registerme . And to echo his point, to assume the complaint is being "investigated" is an assumption too far this point. Hence my comment, best ignore. I would welcome a kyc restriction on membership of the forum. It is a start. Next job is to stop the rewarded stooges used by platforms from making abusive postings. We shall see.
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,624
Likes: 6,437
|
Post by registerme on Oct 9, 2017 23:21:24 GMT
I would welcome a kyc restriction on membership of the forum. Yeah, I see this as an inevitable aspect of the end game for social media discussing investments. I don't know how far out it will be, and whether it's welcome or not it's undeniable that it will be resented by some. It will also introduce cost - actually carrying out KYC, retaining it, complying with DPA etc, but that could be met by some kind of subscription. Only as soon as you introduce money into things like this complications only increase. Nothing that's insurmountable, but hassle, cost, complexity etc will only increase.....
|
|
macq
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,934
Likes: 1,199
|
Post by macq on Oct 9, 2017 23:32:08 GMT
A bit off topic but as i have only been visiting here for a year i am confused by mention of complaints to the FCA from a platform.I understand this forum may have its own rules but is it regulated by the FCA? I often look at forums regarding funds & shares which are almost giving financial advice half the time are they regulated? They may have more staff/money but who regulates the MSE forum where people say all sorts of things or complain about companies without any proof or reviews on Tripadvisor etc?
Not sure what grounds a platform would have to complain but surely if this is an independent forum they would not want a place on here in the first place if they are not happy with the way its run
|
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on Oct 9, 2017 23:57:14 GMT
A bit off topic but as i have only been visiting here for a year i am confused by mention of complaints to the FCA from a platform.I understand this forum may have its own rules but is it regulated by the FCA? I often look at forums regarding funds & shares which are almost giving financial advice half the time are they regulated? They may have more staff/money but who regulates the MSE forum where people say all sorts of things or complain about companies without any proof or reviews on Tripadvisor etc? Not sure what grounds a platform would have to complain but surely if this is an independent forum they would not want a place on here in the first place if they are not happy with the way its run Confused ? Join the club  Actually the premise under which the complaint was made was simple ... the platform in question pretended we are a financial comparisons site, and apparently there is a hefty rule book for such sites. Needless to say I've formally refuted that characterisation of us. As an aside this concept of FCA rules for financial comparisons websites perhaps does raise some potential concerns for the p2p bloggers we see linking to their sites periodically on here. It wouldn't be difficult to see some of them being classified as a financial comparisons site. On the flip side, there is a load of published guidance for FCA regulated companies (i.e. the p2p platforms) about how they should approach the use of social media. This is particularly important if the content of the social media "post" is actually covered by the financial promotions regulations. Whether the platform in question has rigorously observed such guidance since gaining full FCA approval is an interesting point ....
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Oct 10, 2017 3:01:16 GMT
The loss of "The 60" is certainly not to be welcomed but I thank them again for all that they contributed to my journey. However, it surely does not have to mean the end of this forum. Being open to all is its strength and perhaps with some changes to address the issue raised by the departure of "The 60" it will widen its appeal and continue to grow in a way that a secret forum will never be able to do. I am not sure this forum has lost the "60" - to my knowledge, they still post here. I have to agree with chielamangus. I don't see why members of the Secret 60 wouldn't continue to post here. I can see why they might have decided to set up a separate space where they could share DD without having to use *******s and not risk the nasty things that the rules on this public forum are designed to avoid. But once they've done the work and gathered their thoughts on a particular loan or platform, why wouldn't they want to share it here? In the past there have been cases where a platform wanted to do something but were persuaded that it wasn't a good idea and changed their mind. ISTM that sort of influence is what the Secret 60 would want to continue to have, and they can't influence platforms if there's no open line of communication. There has to be a potential for collusion and market manipulation, but I don't know why that's any more likely among the Secret 60 than it might be here by someone with an axe to grind posting Fake News. I think the great majority of the people on here are here because they want to be helpful and to learn from others. From comments made by moderators in this thread, those are similar motivations for those who give freely of their time to keep this forum safe and useful, and I'm very grateful to them for that. I would expect the Secret 60 to have similar motivation. And even if there were to be some of them who would like to try release, or withhold, info for an ulterior motive, I'd expect there would be others who wouldn't agree to such tactics and leaks to this forum would spring up. In short, I really don't see the other forum as a threat to this one, and I don't see why the two fora can't coexist peacefully. But that's JMHO.
|
|
sqh
Member of DD Central
Before P2P, savers put a guinea in a piggy bank, now they smash the banks to become guinea pigs.
Posts: 1,428
Likes: 1,212
|
Post by sqh on Oct 10, 2017 3:59:25 GMT
A bit off topic but as i have only been visiting here for a year i am confused by mention of complaints to the FCA from a platform.I understand this forum may have its own rules but is it regulated by the FCA? I often look at forums regarding funds & shares which are almost giving financial advice half the time are they regulated? They may have more staff/money but who regulates the MSE forum where people say all sorts of things or complain about companies without any proof or reviews on Tripadvisor etc? Not sure what grounds a platform would have to complain but surely if this is an independent forum they would not want a place on here in the first place if they are not happy with the way its run Confused ? Join the club Actually the premise under which the complaint was made was simple ... the platform in question pretended we are a financial comparisons site, and apparently there is a hefty rule book for such sites. Needless to say I've formally refuted that characterisation of us. As an aside this concept of FCA rules for financial comparisons websites perhaps does raise some potential concerns for the p2p bloggers we see linking to their sites periodically on here. It wouldn't be difficult to see some of them being classified as a financial comparisons site. On the flip side, there is a load of published guidance for FCA regulated companies (i.e. the p2p platforms) about how they should approach the use of social media. This is particularly important if the content of the social media "post" is actually covered by the financial promotions regulations. Whether the platform in question has rigorously observed such guidance since gaining full FCA approval is an interesting point .... , KYC (Know Your Customer) and regulation of social media isn't of interest to lenders, we want the FCA to concentrate on factors that effect lender investments.
Namely: 1. Investigate why some Valuation Reports are a joke, and what can be done to support Platforms sue rogue valuers. 2. Investigate the ludicrous costs charged by receivers, and change the law to allow platforms to sell "simple" properties without the need for a receiver. As an example, a receiver took over 50% of the value when selling 2 parking spaces, leaving lenders with a loss of 600 days interest. The platform actually took a hit, to save lender capital losses. 3. Investigate P2P platforms that allow borrowers to supply rogue information. As an example ReBs posted a loan stating that the borrower (a car insurer) had assets worth several times the loan value, allowed the borrower to sell his company and then default on the loan. ReBs took no action against the borrower.
|
|
macq
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,934
Likes: 1,199
|
Post by macq on Oct 10, 2017 7:15:10 GMT
A bit off topic but as i have only been visiting here for a year i am confused by mention of complaints to the FCA from a platform.I understand this forum may have its own rules but is it regulated by the FCA? I often look at forums regarding funds & shares which are almost giving financial advice half the time are they regulated? They may have more staff/money but who regulates the MSE forum where people say all sorts of things or complain about companies without any proof or reviews on Tripadvisor etc? Not sure what grounds a platform would have to complain but surely if this is an independent forum they would not want a place on here in the first place if they are not happy with the way its run Confused ? Join the club Actually the premise under which the complaint was made was simple ... the platform in question pretended we are a financial comparisons site, and apparently there is a hefty rule book for such sites. Needless to say I've formally refuted that characterisation of us. As an aside this concept of FCA rules for financial comparisons websites perhaps does raise some potential concerns for the p2p bloggers we see linking to their sites periodically on here. It wouldn't be difficult to see some of them being classified as a financial comparisons site. On the flip side, there is a load of published guidance for FCA regulated companies (i.e. the p2p platforms) about how they should approach the use of social media. This is particularly important if the content of the social media "post" is actually covered by the financial promotions regulations. Whether the platform in question has rigorously observed such guidance since gaining full FCA approval is an interesting point .... Thanks for clearing that up.It would make more sense as you mention for use of social media by a company to be of more interest
|
|
happy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 397
Likes: 497
|
Post by happy on Oct 10, 2017 7:18:56 GMT
I am not sure this forum has lost the "60" - to my knowledge, they still post here. I have to agree with chielamangus . I don't see why members of the Secret 60 wouldn't continue to post here. I can see why they might have decided to set up a separate space where they could share DD without having to use *******s and not risk the nasty things that the rules on this public forum are designed to avoid. But once they've done the work and gathered their thoughts on a particular loan or platform, why wouldn't they want to share it here? In the past there have been cases where a platform wanted to do something but were persuaded that it wasn't a good idea and changed their mind. ISTM that sort of influence is what the Secret 60 would want to continue to have, and they can't influence platforms if there's no open line of communication. There has to be a potential for collusion and market manipulation, but I don't know why that's any more likely among the Secret 60 than it might be here by someone with an axe to grind posting Fake News. I think the great majority of the people on here are here because they want to be helpful and to learn from others. From comments made by moderators in this thread, those are similar motivations for those who give freely of their time to keep this forum safe and useful, and I'm very grateful to them for that. I would expect the Secret 60 to have similar motivation. And even if there were to be some of them who would like to try release, or withhold, info for an ulterior motive, I'd expect there would be others who wouldn't agree to such tactics and leaks to this forum would spring up. In short, I really don't see the other forum as a threat to this one, and I don't see why the two fora can't coexist peacefully. But that's JMHO. I hoped this would be the case and that one of The 60 would post here to allay our quite legitimate fears (in the absence of any statement from them) over the veil of secrecy that could be drawn over their actions. I agree The 60 can and probably still do post here but quite naturally the bulk of the valuable contribution they made is most likely going to be happening elsewhere going forward. So far I have not seen a single post from a member of The 60 publicly revealing their membership of the new forum and explaining the reasons for them taking their chosen path and how or even if they are planning to share any of their discoveries with this forum. This simpy magnifies the perceived secret nature of this new forum and increases suspicion as to the motives, probably quite wrongly. I get the impression that discussions with the Mods regarding any solution or compromise over this situation have reached an impasse so unfortunately the die appears to have been cast. This leaves us all to draw our own, potentially quite wrong conclusions from the little information we have available to us. Such a shame really! ..........time for another coffee..
|
|
skippyonspeed
Some people think I'm a little bit crazy, but I know my mind's not hazy
Posts: 787
Likes: 424
|
Post by skippyonspeed on Oct 10, 2017 7:21:44 GMT
Don't worry peeps just checked my Trash folder and I have not been invited!!  |
|
macro
Member of DD Central
Posts: 86
Likes: 70
|
Post by macro on Oct 10, 2017 7:33:17 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by chielamangus on Oct 10, 2017 8:30:24 GMT
So far I have not seen a single post from a member of The 60 publicly revealing their membership of the new forum and explaining the reasons for them taking their chosen path and how or even if they are planning to share any of their discoveries with this forum. This simpy magnifies the perceived secret nature of this new forum and increases suspicion as to the motives, probably quite wrongly. You're not reading these posts thoroughly then: Oct 8, 2017 at 10:51am fasty, xell, and 7 more like this Quote Post Options Post by chielamangus on Oct 8, 2017 at 10:51am I am a member of another (non-public) P2P forum, though whether it is the one the mods here are referring to, I have no idea. It is not a secret society, a cabal, or anything furtive or mysterious - it just discusses P2P stuff without any of the restrictions that this forum places on users. The starting post for this thread bespeaks of paranoia and suspicion - the reasons why I no longer post much here and why I value a place with freedom of expression. As far as I am concerned there is space for multiple fora, private and public. ....
|
|
dandy
Posts: 427
Likes: 341
|
Post by dandy on Oct 10, 2017 8:50:37 GMT
I have benefited greatly from this open forum and may look to repay this help in the fullness of time.
Can you all please resolve your differences and keep alive this really valuable resource
+ 1 couldn't have put it any better
|
|
fp
Posts: 1,008
Likes: 853
|
Post by fp on Oct 10, 2017 8:51:51 GMT
So far I have not seen a single post from a member of The 60 publicly revealing their membership of the new forum and explaining the reasons for them taking their chosen path and how or even if they are planning to share any of their discoveries with this forum. This simpy magnifies the perceived secret nature of this new forum and increases suspicion as to the motives, probably quite wrongly. I get the impression that discussions with the Mods regarding any solution or compromise over this situation have reached an impasse so unfortunately the die appears to have been cast. This leaves us all to draw our own, potentially quite wrong conclusions from the little information we have available to us. Such a shame really! ..........time for another coffee.. I'm a member of a private forum too, for much the same reasons as chielamangus. How you choose to treat me as a result of this information is up to you, but what I do in private is my business. While ever P2PIF staff insist on having access to our private forum, there will be no compromise, they aren't a legal body and have no right to make such demands.
|
|
. But again, I would welcome an audit.
