SteveT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,875 
Likes: 7,924
|
Post by SteveT on Jul 8, 2016 9:25:13 GMT
[Mod hat on] Perhaps, but that would be down to SS to justify if there were complaints / problems and something they could decide to change at any moment. We operate a standard policy across the entire forum; please do NOT post information which identifies borrowers (directly or via their assets) SteveT, I've reported your post for providing in the unredacted version sufficient information to identify the borrower with a trivial Google search. I've redacted the loan ID in the version I'm quoting here. Your post broke the same rule that the poster you were complaining about broke. So does every post mentioning a SavingStream loan ID: always a trivial google search to identify the borrower.And as you know it's the moderator practice to ban expressions that can identify the borrower with a trivial google search. Except that you just published one and moderators seem to accept them in SavingStream loan IDs. [Mod hat back on] Yes, very clever of you to highlight this, james. So what would be your solution to this thorny dilemma? Should we close down the Saving Stream board altogether? Or should we stick with the pragmatic approach of using loan numbers when discussing borrowers and their assets so that, in the event savingstream suddenly decide to adjust their website to protect borrower confidentiality (as other platforms do), discussions on here still make sense? ps. As pom has pointed out, I wasn't complaining about anyone. My post was attempting to answer a forum user's question.
|
|
|
|
Post by pepperpot on Jul 8, 2016 9:45:55 GMT
Going back to 'pebble92' would fix the issue. Although, there'd be quite a big editing job going through the whole forum to replace pbl with pebble. Any volunteers?  |
|
|
|
Post by justdabbling on Jul 8, 2016 9:49:40 GMT
I was holding back until the referendum and would have doubled my investment in SS had the result been remain. The Brexit vote combined with finding that there is no certainty about being able to access my money at the end of the loan period has spooked me somewhat.
Now I am thinking about which sectors are more vulnerable and which might prosper from the current situation.
From what is happening with the Commercial Property funds it seems that the market is likely to be flooded with offices and warehouses as the funds seek to liquidate so I am not keen on any 'commercial' property.
From the drop in the value of the pound it seems that tourism and leisure could be safe bets as there is likely to be an increase in 'staycations' and also foreign tourism.
Student housing should also hold its own as many of the students are foreign and UK education would now seem more affordable. The more luxurious student accommodation is targeted to foreign students.
Renewable energy production attracts income through the government schemes and, as oil and gas are priced in $ then the competing fuels may be more costly, depending on what happens with world oil prices, so I am happy to invest in loans leading to the development of renewable energy projects.
Accommodation for the elderly should be a safe bet as sales are largely to cash buyers and the population is ageing, and may even grow if some of the retired UK citizens currently in the EU find they have to return to the UK.
Many of the loans on SS are for conversion from Commercial to Residential and it would seem that there is likely to be less house price inflation that we expected and which may have been factored in so there is a need to be cautious there.
As for what SS can do to increase confidence I would like the new loans to be in the areas that seem to be likely to benefit from Brexit.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 8, 2016 10:04:35 GMT
There is a lot they can do, regular pictures, more detailed updates, any update(!), some reassurance etc. I think some reassurance regards the platform(platform failure is a big worry to many), maybe info on break-even loan origination figures for the site, update on the staff expansion and if this is putting a strain on cash or not, some info on BH liquidity/committed to the site, cash in the bank(RS has £26m in the bank), company financials. Personally I think it's far too early to be worried, but being concerned is normal. PS these problems aren't Brexit, more unlying problems in the economy with regard, banks' capital, low interest rates, asset bubbles, low economic growth, low productivity growth, high debt(both government and consumers), ageing population, political uncertainty, just to name a few. What does the BH from BH liquidity stand for?
|
|
cooling_dude
Bye Bye's for the PPI
Posts: 2,853
Likes: 4,298
|
Post by cooling_dude on Jul 8, 2016 10:05:52 GMT
There is a lot they can do, regular pictures, more detailed updates, any update(!), some reassurance etc. I think some reassurance regards the platform(platform failure is a big worry to many), maybe info on break-even loan origination figures for the site, update on the staff expansion and if this is putting a strain on cash or not, some info on BH liquidity/committed to the site, cash in the bank(RS has £26m in the bank), company financials. Personally I think it's far too early to be worried, but being concerned is normal. PS these problems aren't Brexit, more unlying problems in the economy with regard, banks' capital, low interest rates, asset bubbles, low economic growth, low productivity growth, high debt(both government and consumers), ageing population, political uncertainty, just to name a few. What does the BH from BH liquidity stand for? ig Hitter - I.e. somebody who has invested far more than the average investor on SS As a new member, make sure you have a good read of ilmoro FAQ post (pinned at the top of the SS forum page or click here) 
|
|
james
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 955
|
Post by james on Jul 8, 2016 10:08:19 GMT
SteveT, I've reported your post for providing in the unredacted version sufficient information to identify the borrower with a trivial Google search. I've redacted the loan ID in the version I'm quoting here. Your post broke the same rule that the poster you were complaining about broke. So does every post mentioning a SavingStream loan ID: always a trivial google search to identify the borrower.And as you know it's the moderator practice to ban expressions that can identify the borrower with a trivial google search. Except that you just published one and moderators seem to accept them in SavingStream loan IDs. [Mod hat back on] Yes, very clever of you to highlight this, james . So what would be your solution to this thorny dilemma? Should we close down the Saving Stream board altogether? Or should we stick with the pragmatic approach of using loan numbers when discussing borrowers and their assets so that, in the event savingstream suddenly decide to adjust their website to protect borrower confidentiality (as other platforms do), discussions on here still make sense? ps. As pom has pointed out, I wasn't complaining about anyone. My post was attempting to answer a forum user's question. It's not particularly clever, I assume it's pretty obvious to all posters here that SavingStream loan IDs allow trivial searches to identify the borrower and that the moderators have been taking no action on this even though I assume that the mods also know it. You weren't objecting to it but I was. It seemed like a reasonable opportunity to ask the moderation team to say what combination of rules they are using to allow the SavingStream loan IDs to be mentioned and be consistent with that Google search rule. Or to implicitly suggest that a change of practice should be considered. What I suggest in preference order is one of these: 1. that the moderators use the prior publication by the platform rule, at which point mentioning the SavingStream loan ID is more fine because all it leads to is information previously made public by the platform and the moderators are being consistent in allowing searches that turn up nothing more than the public information in the SavingStream published loan descriptions. Of course that SavingStream loan information may then allow other searches that also do no more than result in the SavingStream loan page (vs say news stories that do much more). 2. alternatively the moderators can determine that the SavingStream loan IDs are to be an exception to the trivial Google search rule and go with inconsistency of that one. 3. or the moderators can go with what's really required to block that disclosure of borrower information and actually ban the mentioning of SavingStream loan IDs. That works on other boards like say Ablrate where the loan identifies are a description of the loan, with no convenient single identifier. For example there's the "December container loan" topic there now and similar practices could be used for SavingStream. Or the mods can come up with something else. I've made three suggestions in my preference order. The main reason for those preferences is that the original concerns that prompted this set of rules were largely about identification of individual human beings and potential breaches of the law and guidelines relating to unfair debt collection practices and embarrassing humans as part of debt collection, as well as general human privacy. Those concerns do not generally apply to business loans. So I think it's fine to have a more strict standard for individuals than for businesses. However, that doesn't mean that I think all business mentions are fine, and know for example that sometimes MoneyThing would not be comfortable with that and have said so. The platforms have been kind enough to resolve this for us: they decide what they are willing to mention in public. So we can use their decision about what to publish to guide how we do things. To simplify moderation it doesn't seem unduly hard to have a post in one central public place or in the sections that says which practice applies for each platform based on what they do. Of course the issue that the platform could change what it does remains but there are limits to how much a platform can remove when it makes such a change because much information is archived around the web and it's not really viable to remove it all even after a change of practice. So, my view is that the best course is one that recognises that the platforms and human/business cases do differ and that it makes sense to act accordingly. I don't think that there's any particularly urgent need to resolve this so perhaps you might want to try to keep the mod hat off and relax for at least the weekend while the team and members toss around thoughts about how best to deal with it. I like privacy a lot, so... it's not particularly easy and I know it.
|
|
SteveT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,875
Likes: 7,924
|
Post by SteveT on Jul 8, 2016 10:12:31 GMT
I'm reasonably confident the Mod team already knows how to "deal with it", but thanks for your input.
|
|
james
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 955
|
Post by james on Jul 8, 2016 10:15:36 GMT
Going back to 'pebble92' would fix the issue. Although, there'd be quite a big editing job going through the whole forum to replace pbl with pebble. Any volunteers? It'd work but I really hope that that isn't the option used. I don't mind exceptions, the world is full of them and we humans do manage to deal with them. Just nice to say they are exceptions rather than ignoring them. Which is sort of what I was after, a change from a de facto exception to explicitly acknowledged exception. (shrug) I'm sure the mods will toss this one around in the back room for a while and hopefully then toss some thoughts are way in a more relevant section to see if we can collectively come up with something that seems satisfying to both the desire for consistency and the inconvenience of an inconsistent world. If we do end up with an explicit exception for the SavingStream loan ID, then we should also have the consistency of allowing other searches which just produce the same hit on the SavingStream public loan description, else it looks a bit silly to allow one but not the other.
|
|
Liz
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,426
Likes: 1,297
|
Post by Liz on Jul 8, 2016 10:16:31 GMT
[Mod hat back on] Yes, very clever of you to highlight this, james . So what would be your solution to this thorny dilemma? Should we close down the Saving Stream board altogether? Or should we stick with the pragmatic approach of using loan numbers when discussing borrowers and their assets so that, in the event savingstream suddenly decide to adjust their website to protect borrower confidentiality (as other platforms do), discussions on here still make sense? ps. As pom has pointed out, I wasn't complaining about anyone. My post was attempting to answer a forum user's question. It's not particularly clever, I assume it's pretty obvious to all posters here that SavingStream loan IDs allow trivial searches to identify the borrower and that the moderators have been taking no action on this even though I assume that the mods also know it. You weren't objecting to it but I was. It seemed like a reasonable opportunity to ask the moderation team to say what combination of rules they are using to allow the SavingStream loan IDs to be mentioned and be consistent with that Google search rule. Or to implicitly suggest that a change of practice should be considered. What I suggest in preference order is one of these: 1. that the moderators use the prior publication by the platform rule, at which point mentioning the SavingStream loan ID is more fine because all it leads to is information previously made public by the platform and the moderators are being consistent in allowing searches that turn up nothing more than the public information in the SavingStream published loan descriptions. Of course that SavingStream loan information may then allow other searches that also do no more than result in the SavingStream loan page (vs say news stories that do much more). 2. alternatively the moderators can determine that the SavingStream loan IDs are to be an exception to the trivial Google search rule and go with inconsistency of that one. 3. or the moderators can go with what's really required to block that disclosure of borrower information and actually ban the mentioning of SavingStream loan IDs. That works on other boards like say Ablrate where the loan identifies are a description of the loan, with no convenient single identifier. For example there's the "December container loan" topic there now and similar practices could be used for SavingStream. Or the mods can come up with something else. I've made three suggestions in my preference order. The main reason for those preferences is that the original concerns that prompted this set of rules were largely about identification of individual human beings and potential breaches of the law and guidelines relating to unfair debt collection practices and embarrassing humans as part of debt collection, as well as general human privacy. Those concerns do not generally apply to business loans. So I think it's fine to have a more strict standard for individuals than for businesses. However, that doesn't mean that I think all business mentions are fine, and know for example that sometimes MoneyThing would not be comfortable with that and have said so. The platforms have been kind enough to resolve this for us: they decide what they are willing to mention in public. So we can use their decision about what to publish to guide how we do things. To simplify moderation it doesn't seem unduly hard to have a post in one central public place or in the sections that says which practice applies for each platform based on what they do. Of course the issue that the platform could change what it does remains but there are limits to how much a platform can remove when it makes such a change because much information is archived around the web and it's not really viable to remove it all even after a change of practice. So, my view is that the best course is one that recognises that the platforms and human/business cases do differ and that it makes sense to act accordingly. I don't think that there's any particularly urgent need to resolve this so perhaps you might want to try to keep the mod hat off and relax for at least the weekend while the team and members toss around thoughts about how best to deal with it. I like privacy a lot, so... it's not particularly easy and I know it. The Big Hitters can put in £100k each into a loan, so really helps getting quality large deals filled, where other platforms wouldn't be able to fill the loan.
|
|
james
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 955
|
Post by james on Jul 8, 2016 10:17:33 GMT
I'm reasonably confident the Mod team already knows how to "deal with it", but thanks for your input. Well, I can see how it's been done, but it'd be nice to be explicit about it.
|
|
Liz
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,426
Likes: 1,297
|
Post by Liz on Jul 8, 2016 10:24:35 GMT
I'm reasonably confident the Mod team already knows how to "deal with it", but thanks for your input. Well, I can see how it's been done, but it'd be nice to be explicit about it. Maybe you should volunteer to become a Moderator.
|
|
james
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 955
|
Post by james on Jul 8, 2016 10:31:41 GMT
Well, I can see how it's been done, but it'd be nice to be explicit about it. Maybe you should volunteer to become a Moderator. I did that in another place for many years and think it's more useful for me to be able to ask inconvenient questions of platforms without any risk of it being thought of as an official view of this forum. In spite of mod hat on or off statements a person who is a moderator needs to do a good deal more censorship of their posts to reduce risk to the forum.
|
|
james
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 955
|
Post by james on Jul 8, 2016 10:38:38 GMT
|
|
kaya
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,150
Likes: 718
|
Post by kaya on Jul 8, 2016 12:03:57 GMT
Will everyone please stop talking about investor confidence! The more everyone talks about it, the less confident I become.  I'm starting to sell!  |
|
archie
Posts: 1,866
Likes: 1,861
|
Post by archie on Jul 8, 2016 12:27:26 GMT
Will everyone please stop talking about investor confidence! The more everyone talks about it, the less confident I become. I'm starting to sell! I've increased P2P lending (mainly on MT though), hope that cheers you up 
|
|
I'm starting to sell! 
