Discussion in 'Marketplace Discussions' started by Fripper, Jun 20, 2022.
Why did you give the vendor your phone number?
That was so long ago, I don't remember if it was even on the order form! I wanna say, somewhen around 2011...? I didn't even question it at the time, so I must have put it on something.
I know my real name and number was in the phone book back then.
Oh it's getting better. One user is going through my submissions including those for the label I run and the roles my ANV performs on the releases. He has changed every single one to disassociate the ANV from my real identity. This is just petty & spiteful stuff now.
There are some real idiots on Discogs, you can't avoid some of them. One record dealer I know, who used to sell on Discogs, was told by some people that the vintage LPs he listed for sale "didn't exist." Not only did he own them, but he wrote a discography and published it in how to identify the various pressings of the label. He abandoned Discogs as a waste of time, too bad, he's got some great stuff in his store.
If what he's doing is wrong, start a thread in the database forum as other users will chime in and help. You can also report the user for vandalising the database.
I've been selling on Discogs for like 10 years and just recently I've had several Cancelled - Non-Paying Buyer transactions, all from newbie buyers. Very annoying.
Ah yes - one of my friends with an acetate bought off a band member that played on it is accused of making the disc up and photoshopping the images.
That's easy to ignore. I'd not concern myself with defending it. A picture is worth a hundred bucks.
I have been making changes to Discogs database quite a bit. Not a single dispute thankfully. I've changed the year of release and even the country of pressing on some. When there are a lot of sellers of a given item, I start to wonder when they are going to come out after me after I do a major edit.
Sometimes I do small edits, go back and do a few more and add better pictures. In other words, I don't do a full-on reworking of the given entry all at once, but in smaller steps.
Last night I did an edit on an old early WB Target label CD. The entry said "no mention of Made in Japan on the disc." I changed it to "Made in Japan is stated on the lower six-o'clock position on the disc." One could see it faintly in the picture already up. And my original copy shows it clearly. That error had been up for 7 years and nobody changed it. I may add a picture from my copy and inactivate the current one where the print is so faint.
If what you did was correct, no one will bother you. I only get bothered when I do something wrong lol.
I often find errors in the notes section as, often, the original submitter used another entry as their starting point but then failed to delete information not pertinent to the release they entered.
There's a guy who spams all Led Zeppelin Classic Records entries with the BS that he bought the record like 7-8 years before they even existed and is relentlessly adamant about it. Is that you?
Yes, that is what is a common, and easy mistake to make. I got into it with a guy who does not buy or sell or have (I think) much of a collection on Discogs. He's only in it to contribute to the database. And he likes to go in and do edits on existing entries. As if he is keeping track of points gained or something.
Anyway, I mentioned it some time ago. But basically, he went into a series and took out the name of the series from the title line. Often imo the series is also a part of the title. Like "Super Hits Of The '70s - Have A Nice Day, Vol. 5" and then removing the Super Hits Of The '70s part from the title, and claiming only the "Have a Nice Day, Vol. 5" part is the real title, the other part is series only. He stood his ground being sure his fellow database editors would back him. Then he posted links to support his position on the database rules. The series in question was not a Rhino series. But I was following what I had seen done on all Rhino series sets. The series name is a part of the title as well.
So two things happened. The links he recklessly or carelessly provided - backed my position. And none of his friends or fellow contributors (whom he had invited) came into the thread to back him. He still stood his ground, as I flat out told him his position had more holes in it than Swiss Cheese! And furthermore, (I said) I am going in and fixing the entire series which he did a mass edit to without taking a poll on it in the forums or comments section. And while he was changing the titles on the entire series, he failed to fix obvious mistakes in other fields in the entries. In other words, he was into doing edits for the fun of it and his thrill, rather than getting everything absolutely correct.
When others were once again invited to come and defend his edits, a few showed up and told him that the "more complete title" is used when there is any question on the matter. Basically repeating what they had stated in the links he had provided.
So what I got from this is that there are people who are out there doing Discogs edits for their own feelings of control and influence, and digging sometimes into obscure sets and series where there are very few sellers, maybe no other contributors of the given title around and going to work on them. Some commented that these edits were "preference" edits. A new term I have not heard before.
So I won that edit war (all agreed with me), but it left me feeling kind of weird in my gut that I would be arguing with a person who had been around many years, and was far more experienced at it than I. It was in fact creepy.
I look at it this way; I'm not perfect. Other than the person changing the song titles to all caps I've had no problems with any of the few edits to the few entries I've made. I'm still amazed I did an entry for Goat's Head Soup. The CD can't be all that uncommon.
If I had more time, I'd do more entries because I've had a few come up that aren't there. The problem is that they can be time consuming. Maybe if and when I retire.....
Yeah there are and I always wondered what they got out of it.
They can be very helpful or, as you experienced, highly annoying. If they happen to hit on something you did that they don't agree with, they can be very aggressive about it and won't back down no matter how many times they are told they are wrong. I think they get a bit embarrassed when they're told they are wrong and, hence, find it harder to back down. They usually slink away though.
Never heard of "preference" edits either.
I'll summarize that guy for you:
Some people have far too much time on their hands, and not enough practical sense.
Discogs is too cheap to hire any professional curators to adjudicate stuff like this, so the amount of garbage in the database keeps getting larger.
Ever been to a record show? Yeah...those guys.
Every hobby has its loud mouth know-it-alls. It becomes their own slice-of-kingdom, a realm where they feel valued & important.
Preference edits on Discogs refers to those who rearrange the order of the LCCN and BaOI credit to suit their fancy, without making any other edits. I thought that you were supposed to use the order in the dropdown menus, but some users claim that the matrix / runout and SID codes have to be listed at the bottom of the BaOI, in case of multiple variants. They claim that there potentially might be variants, so one can not list them in the order of the dropdown menu.
The biggest headaches are often caused by people entering data who have no knowledge of the genre, artist or songwriters, they have no clue how to link the data properly, especially when there are errors on the releases.
One of the biggest pains on Discogs is when you put a ton of work into copying and pasting to create a new listing, adding lots of missing data and credits, then some jerk votes "Needs Minor Changes" because you overlooked a minor detail copied from the previous listing.
It's one thing to vote negatively when someone has made edits to a listing that are incorrect, but I always just make the edits myself without voting when i uncover a minor issue that is easily fixed. There seem to be a number of these folks around recently, including one who voted as such because I didn't include the bit rate on a download. The reason I didn't include it is that I didn't know it and had no way of figuring it out, since the download had long since been lost, due to a computer or hard drive crash, all I had was the WAV CDr that I burned.
I usually have to nudge them. I think most newbies just don't know how it works. Honestly, Discogs isn't that simple until you do certain things a few times. I usually just say something like, "I can get this out tomorrow if you send payment today." Most times they thought they did already.
I just had a strange Discogs purchase. Someone who has been using the site for some time with lots of transactions made four purchases from me in the same day and prepaid. As a result, I couldn't merge the orders and adjust the postage. So after I shipped it at the USPS, I refunded $4 in postage on each order, as $36 was ridiculous for shipping 16 CDs via insured media mail.
I think I have only had one or two people fail to pay after ordering and I just let the automatic cancellation take care of it. The worst one was the guy who made an offer on an expensive LP set (over $150) and then claimed he did it accidentally. Consider the process you have to go through to make an offer, I didn't buy it, though I cancelled it and blocked him from future purchases.
I did some research once trying to figure out how to contribute as I've purchased a handful of things that took weeks to get listed, and thought I'd help. Was quickly scared away by the process and I do appreciate the tons of work that more dedicate people put into the site.
That said, I do enjoy the notifications I get when changes are made to items in my collection, and do get a chuckle out of some of them when you can tell people are snipping at each other. Examples are blurry pictures, typos, outright deletions with snide comments, etc. I saw one today, I think it was of a Pink Floyd the Wall pressing that I had, where it said "pictures re-ordered to be presented in the way that the artist intended". I'm sure this random Discogs user sat down with members of the band and had them approve the picture order, right?
I started using discogs around November of last year. I saw a video showing how cool it was to catalog your music. Usually I purchased music from other sources. Then I decided to give it a try. Had great experiences. Only one vendor sent me an incorrect item -not the same version and year-which is big for us Beatles fans- and would not take it back-and admitted to sending the wrong item. It is tough there though. As I found out. You are at the mercy of the vendor. Discogs doesn't really help very much as my experience has shown. So unlike other places to find music...you are on your own. So I stick to sellers that I have used. I have had the best results from individual sellers selling their collections. Problem is...when you want a specific item that those sellers dont have. Also the data base can be a little messy...and just try to update info....it can be challenging. Should we not all be working together for the best info? I really enjoy local record stores. BUT. It seems that most of the record shops in my area sell VG+ or less. (And prob sell the good stuff on discogs- LOL)
But if you pay with Paypal, you're covered. You could put in a claim for "Item not as described" (or whatever their wording is). You may have to return the item and provide tracking to Paypal as proof, but chances are good that you'll get your money back. They even have a service you can sign up for that reimburses return postage costs, which comes in handy for international returns. Be careful with that, though, because they have a limit on how many returns they'll reimburse you for.
Yes. But you dont have to do this thru most on line vendors I have used . And I have never been asked to pay return postage for an item that was sent to me incorrectly. LOL. And if you dont use Paypal ...which some of us dont... you need to file a dispute and hope you win. Other sites have rules that vendors have to follow if you are sent something that is not as it is described. Again. Learning.
OK. I was just pointing out that you don't need to be at the mercy of Discogs sellers if you use Paypal, which seemingly the majority of people do.
My understanding is that Paypal tends to side with the buyers when there's a dispute. From first hand experience as a buyer, the few times I needed them to step in, they've ruled in my favor every time. ("Every time" is only a handful of orders over many years, though, and includes Ebay as well.) I have no experience with a dispute being filed against me as a seller, but from what I've read on the Discogs forums, sellers don't tend to win disputes nearly as often. If the seller isn't doing the right thing, I think you're more likely to win disputes than not. One just needs to realize when the seller hasn't actually done anything wrong. That's not aimed at you, it's a generality.
About other vendors having rules that need to be followed: Discogs has rules for their sellers also, but whether they enforce them might be a different matter!
They have very little rules. Discogs offers no buyer protection so sellers don't need to worry about them sticking their nose in like you would need to do on Amazon or eBay. Discogs can do very little when it comes to these disputes. Their rules tend to focus on seller and buyer behavior on the site, responding on time, stuff like that. If they step in because of a bad transaction it's usually because of feedback review or behavior issues after that fact.
I often see buyers posting about how to get in touch with Discogs because a seller badly graded an lp and stuff like that.
Separate names with a comma.