|
|
Post by d_saver on Oct 9, 2017 11:43:31 GMT
Common sense 0 - paranoia 1 I'm not sure that doesn't sum up this entire thread...
|
|
|
|
Post by westcountry on Oct 9, 2017 11:46:28 GMT
mrclondon , why would the proposed DD Central forum need to be restricted to a small subset of P2PIF members? I can understand why it would need to be a private forum, so that borrowers could be named for DD purposes, but why restrict access to only a few P2PIF members? I mention this, as if the DD Central forum idea went ahead, I'd be inclined to take anything posted on here from the DD Central forum with a large pinch of salt - how do I know it's true, and not an attempt by the DD Central people to manipulate the market in a particular loan? For example, if the DD Central report was that a loan was fine with no problems, how could I be sure the loan isn't really dodgy, but the DD Central people want to pretend it's fine, so they can sell their holdings in the loan before it possibly defaults? Or if DD Central reported a loan was dodgy, how could I know that the loan isn't actually fine, but that the DD Central members want to create a run on this loan, so that they could buy up large holdings in it, possibly at a discount (if on a platform that allows discounts on the secondary market)? As well, what if a member who's not part of the DD Central select few has some very relevant DD information? I would suggest that if the DD Central idea goes ahead, that membership of the DD Central forum is opened to all P2PIF members who meet reasonable criteria - say been a member for 30 days, made at least 10 posts, and not in any trouble with the moderators. Common sense 0 - paranoia 1 Paranoia maybe, but it doesn't alter my original question - why does the DD Central forum have to be kept secret and only accessible by a select few of the P2PIF membership?
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,624 
Likes: 6,437
|
Post by registerme on Oct 9, 2017 11:47:40 GMT
One final question for Mods. What do you get out of this, really? Do you do it for the love of the hobby? Is it because you simply want to help others? Is it because you might have access to information you otherwise would not? As I understand it, the mods are completely unpaid? Assuming you get absolutely nothing in direct compensation, there must be a reason each of you commits his/her time, even if it's simply for the love of interaction with fellow p2p'rs? I really would be interested to know why each of you became a mod (truthfully) and why you continue to commit your time? Perhaps with the leaving of 60 or so users (thought it sounds like all didn't actually leave as such), these reasons no longer exist? Interesting question, and one I have been asking myself recently  . I guess I can split my answer in two. The general reasons I do it include:- 1. That I think P2P has the power to be positive, disruptive, and achieve better returns for savers / investors than more traditional forms of saving or investment (especially cash products). 2. To that end I think the P2PIF has been an important resource for both lenders and for platforms. I don't think it's wide of the mark to say that the P2PIF has been instrumental in the growth of some platforms, particularly Lendy, MT, Collateral and ablrate. I would hope that this is of benefit to both lenders and the platforms (though this is not guaranteed). On the lender side examination of loans has often highlighted concerns that have enabled us to "dodge bullets" or at least get better terms. It has certainly helped educate many, me included. Equally feedback from lenders has often led to improvements in what platforms offer or how they operate. These are good things in my opinion. 3. I think moderation, at least with regards to the P2PIF, is necessary. Reasons more specific to me, personally, include:- 1. Some relevant experience that helps (a background in finance and IT). 2. I have seen and used well moderated forums, and poorly moderated forums, and the difference is stark. 3. I guess I have some marginal positive influence on platforms that I might not have were I not a staff member. Equally I am quite certain that there are some platforms and some platform reps that absolutely loathe me (no prizes for guessing which) that I wouldn't have to deal with were I not a staff member. Either way this doesn't benefit me individually. 4. I have the time, though I fear that the net result is that some simply resent me and the role I fullfill. 5. In general I enjoy the interaction with other forumites (as I do on other non p2p related forums). What I don't enjoy dealing with is the resentment that sometimes occurs when somebody is taken to task for breaking a forum rule. Most people just respond "sorry about that, I'll try to make sure it doesn't happen again" which is great. Some respond more... negatively. 5. I think that, in some small part, I help to make the world a better place. I can think of two occasions when, as a result of my staff role, I received information that wasn't in the public domain. On both occasions I was already in the loans. One of the occasions occurred after the default had taken place, so I couldn't trade out of it even if I wanted to. In this case we pointed the person concerned in the direction of the administrators. The other defaulted as I received the information (so I was still in the loan) and the conversation was about a concern that a borrower would appear on the forums and act inappropriately. It's now in the hands of the courts. I am still in both loans.
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,624
Likes: 6,437
|
Post by registerme on Oct 9, 2017 11:51:54 GMT
Common sense 0 - paranoia 1 Paranoia maybe, but it doesn't alter my original question - why does the DD Central forum have to be kept secret and only accessible by a select few of the P2PIF membership? It's not secret - it's been announced. It's a work in progress and protocols for how information derived from it is transferred to the public facing board need to be worked on. But you might not want, for instance, platform reps to have access to it. Equally you might not want to put the effort in or engage in the analysis that could take place there.
|
|
|
|
Post by westcountry on Oct 9, 2017 11:57:42 GMT
Paranoia maybe, but it doesn't alter my original question - why does the DD Central forum have to be kept secret and only accessible by a select few of the P2PIF membership? It's not secret - it's been announced. It's a work in progress and protocols for how information derived from it is transferred to the public facing board need to be worked on. But you might not want, for instance, platform reps to have access to it. Equally you might not want to put the effort in or engage in the analysis that could take place there. Thanks for your reply registerme. I was referring to the proposed DD Central forum as secret in terms of its discussions are kept to the select few who are members, not secret as in no-one knows/mentions it exists. I can understand platform reps not being allowed to see the discussions in the DD Central forum, that makes sense. But I don't understand why the average P2PIF member wouldn't be allowed to see the discussions on the DD Central boards?
|
|
archie
Posts: 1,866
Likes: 1,861
|
Post by archie on Oct 9, 2017 11:59:18 GMT
Common sense 0 - paranoia 1 Paranoia maybe, but it doesn't alter my original question - why does the DD Central forum have to be kept secret and only accessible by a select few of the P2PIF membership? I'm one of the currently invited DD Central members, presumably because I post a lot. I've been arguing exactly the same thing.
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,624
Likes: 6,437
|
Post by registerme on Oct 9, 2017 12:02:43 GMT
I don't think "secret" is the right word. But one practical reason is simply how groups are permissioned. You either permission everybody, or you only permission individuals. In other words you can't permission everybody and then remove those you don't want (eg platform reps).
Permissioning 3500 odd people individually would be.... onerous.
|
|
seeingred
Member of DD Central
Posts: 470
Likes: 664
|
Post by seeingred on Oct 9, 2017 12:04:52 GMT
please be sure to offer the reigns to someone else. I think you meant reins, apart from that, well argued, albeit a little long. Or maybe you were referring to a reign of terror? People here do appreciate a calm and well reasoned approach - look at the new member sarahcount - 2 posts and 17 likes already.
|
|
|
|
Post by bonfemme on Oct 9, 2017 12:15:02 GMT
I don't think this thread has served any useful purpose. All it has done is spread discord and disharmony through the P2PIF community.
|
|
|
|
Post by chielamangus on Oct 9, 2017 12:28:42 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. And it is hardly secret, just private. It could have been a win-win situation but the attitude of the mods here seems to be to attempt to stifle any development of the P2P investor community. They are the self-appointed guardians of the status quo.
|
|
|
|
Post by Badly Drawn Stickman on Oct 9, 2017 12:33:25 GMT
I don't think "secret" is the right word. But one practical reason is simply how groups are permissioned. You either permission everybody, or you only permission individuals. In other words you can't permission everybody and then remove those you don't want (eg platform reps). Permissioning 3500 odd people individually would be.... onerous. From memory, you can deny access to groups, so suitably tagging platform reps would work in theory. In practice they would just create a separate login detail to gain entry. The big problem here, that everybody is ignoring is the name. Honestly people metaphorically sat round a table for hours, and the best they could do is DD Central. Not exactly snappy is it. Not sure what the new secret one is called (guess my invite is in the post) but it bet its pretty cool.
|
|
jo
Member of DD Central
dead
Posts: 741
Likes: 498
|
Post by jo on Oct 9, 2017 12:44:53 GMT
|
|
oldgrumpy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,087
Likes: 3,233
|
Post by oldgrumpy on Oct 9, 2017 12:50:58 GMT
A certain type of, cough, 'internet user' is going to be mightily upset when they discover DD Central is a p2p forum and not what they thought!    Aaaaaah! Busted! 
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 11,329
Likes: 11,549
|
Post by ilmoro on Oct 9, 2017 12:56:25 GMT
I don't think "secret" is the right word. But one practical reason is simply how groups are permissioned. You either permission everybody, or you only permission individuals. In other words you can't permission everybody and then remove those you don't want (eg platform reps). Permissioning 3500 odd people individually would be.... onerous. From memory, you can deny access to groups, so suitably tagging platform reps would work in theory. In practice they would just create a separate login detail to gain entry. The big problem here, that everybody is ignoring is the name. Honestly people metaphorically sat round a table for hours, and the best they could do is DD Central. Not exactly snappy is it. Not sure what the new secret one is called (guess my invite is in the post) but it bet its pretty cool. You are assuming of course that the post of secret village idiot hasnt already been filled. If not, perhaps I should apply. Walking around with a pig on your head seems like it would score significant points on the idiotic scale though I may be disqualified on the grounds that the smell would undermine the whole undetectability angle. After all who's ever heard of a secret or invisible pig farm. 
|
|
twoheads
Member of DD Central
Programming
Posts: 1,089
Likes: 1,192
|
Post by twoheads on Oct 9, 2017 12:58:14 GMT
I believe that in order for DD-Central to succeed it has to be open to the entire P2PIF membership while remaining closed to general view (non forum members). Any closed group of specially selected members would be pretty much the same as this SPF that has been described and therefore somewhat hypocritical.
To make DD-Central equitable (as seems to be the prime requirement) then everyone must, by default, start with access to DD-Central and if members then abuse those privileges, they must be warned and persistent offenders banned.
I, like many others, cannot understand what all the fuss is about a small number of investors having their own private discussion forum with whatever rules it likes.
Does the existence of this SPF detract from this forum? I think not.
|
|
. I guess I can split my answer in two.
