[Brainstorm] How do we verify/validate newbie/unknown bidders in larger auctions

[teeGUMES]

This has been going on for longer than any of us can remember, week long auction, end time is coming up fast and before you know it you're being outbid by someone that came out of nowhere with no recent activity.. is this person legitimate or are they a sock puppet bidding us up? Impossible to tell and it is hard to want to continue bidding against this person(real or not).

I've never seen a moderator active or do anything(unless behind the scenes) in this space (not a bad thing imo), I firmly believe that the Collectibles community runs itself in regards to Auctions and Sales and leaving good trust/bad trust for people that do not follow the standard that we run here. As a community we have run off some shady actors, but also lost ourselves a few good actors in the process unfortunately.

We need to come up with something that is non invasive, not costly, non profit making, but agreeable upon by bidders and auction hosters (whether single person or a corporation).

[1714903701]

1714903701

[1714903701]

1714903701

[teeGUMES]

Reserved for rules if we come to a conclusion

[shasan]

To verify/validate newbie/unknown bidders in larger auctions you can take start auction price in advance to make his/her bid as valid bid. Many people usually mention that they can ask to send small amount from non reputed bidders.

[BitcoinNewsMagazine]

One way would be to only accept bids from new accounts who had taken the trouble to pay for Copper membership. Not foolproof but does indicate the buyer is more serious. However if you are auctioning a collectible that should fetch a high price, have the new accounts prove they have the bitcoin to pay by signing that address and send the message in a PM before allowing them to bid.

[bavicrypto]

I’d say it’s a good idea for newbie accounts to make a small deposit to a third party, trusted person, like MJ.
That way the escrow can always confirm the deposit, and hold it in case the newbie doesn’t honor his bid.
Once the newbie account has plenty of feedback to confirm he’s legit, there’s no more need for this ofcourse.
What do you guys think about this?

[Ticked]

I’d say it’s a good idea for newbie accounts to make a small deposit to a third party, trusted person, like MJ.
That way the escrow can always confirm the deposit, and hold it in case the newbie doesn’t honor his bid.
Once the newbie account has plenty of feedback to confirm he’s legit, there’s no more need for this ofcourse.
What do you guys think about this?

I can't believe I agree with bavi. I agree with bavi. One caveat, how much of a deposit is necessary to bid on an item considering in auctions we won't know the final price.

I'd alter a bit and say put x amount in escrow and signed message from a wallet showing balance capable of paying for the item at hand.

[krogothmanhattan]

Lots of good points...however I feel this thread is also pointing out on possible alts made by the seller himself.

How does one verify that?

In other words prevent shill bidding from happening

[Lesbian Cow]

I use this verbiage:

Excluded from Bidding:   I may exclude/disqualify bidders, or require a deposit, for any bidders at my sole discretion.  If you are a brand new account, or have issues in your trust feedback, please PM prior to bidding.

I haven't had a single non paying winning bidder on any of my auctions.  I have had a few ghost when asked to put a deposit.

Edit to add:  Regarding shill bidders, I cannot think of a way to 100% eliminate that possibility with the forum set up.  You would need a centralized authority such as ebay. 

[teeGUMES]

I’d say it’s a good idea for newbie accounts to make a small deposit to a third party, trusted person, like MJ.
That way the escrow can always confirm the deposit, and hold it in case the newbie doesn’t honor his bid.
Once the newbie account has plenty of feedback to confirm he’s legit, there’s no more need for this ofcourse.
What do you guys think about this?

I can't believe I agree with bavi. I agree with bavi. One caveat, how much of a deposit is necessary to bid on an item considering in auctions we won't know the final price.

I'd alter a bit and say put x amount in escrow and signed message from a wallet showing balance capable of paying for the item at hand.

Escrows don't work for free and this is a lot of responsibility if something falls through and said escrow 'vouches' for them through this service.
It's going to be tough to find something that works and it's the reason we don't already have something in place.

I think copper membership is a start and a must. But needs something further.

[BitcoinNewsMagazine]

LC's solution has proven to work so I think I would do the same if I were auctioning, can't argue with success:) I would go one step further and also require new accounts to have Copper membership.

The Copper membership requirement might cut down on the shill bidding, might not. Have to try and see. The problem is someone auctioning who wants shill bids would not require the Copper membership. I also don't see a moderator putting a rule in place requiring Copper membership for new accounts to participate in auctions.

[BitcoinPenny]

Lots of good points...however I feel this thread is also pointing out on possible alts made by the seller himself.

How does one verify that?

In other words prevent shill bidding from happening

^^^ This is my concern too.

Reading the comments thus far, it seems the collectibles community is talking about two distinct problems.

If the problem is a newbie account not paying after the win, then yes, an escrow deposit would be a good solution. Personally, I’ve never seen that as a problem in need of a solution.

However, I am concerned with shill bidding. Unfortunately, an escrow deposit does nothing to stop shill bidding.

How might we stop shill bidding scoundrels? That’s my question.

Regards,
Chris

[OgNasty]

How might we stop shill bidding scoundrels? That’s my question.

When you see a high bid from a suspected shill, step back and let them win.  Eventually they'll figure it out.  The community should also take a harsher stance to those who have been caught manipulating auctions, and those who have knowingly allowed it while staying silent.

[krogothmanhattan]

Lots of good points...however I feel this thread is also pointing out on possible alts made by the seller himself.

How does one verify that?

In other words prevent shill bidding from happening

^^^ This is my concern too.

Reading the comments thus far, it seems the collectibles community is talking about two distinct problems.

If the problem is a newbie account not paying after the win, then yes, an escrow deposit would be a good solution. Personally, I’ve never seen that as a problem in need of a solution.

However, I am concerned with shill bidding. Unfortunately, an escrow deposit does nothing to stop shill bidding.

How might we stop shill bidding scoundrels? That’s my question.

Regards,
Chris

And it has happened as I see some people tagged with shill bidding accusations. Whose to say its not still happening? To me thats the biggest concern.

[bavicrypto]

Lots of good points...however I feel this thread is also pointing out on possible alts made by the seller himself.

How does one verify that?

In other words prevent shill bidding from happening

^^^ This is my concern too.

Reading the comments thus far, it seems the collectibles community is talking about two distinct problems.

If the problem is a newbie account not paying after the win, then yes, an escrow deposit would be a good solution. Personally, I’ve never seen that as a problem in need of a solution.

However, I am concerned with shill bidding. Unfortunately, an escrow deposit does nothing to stop shill bidding.

How might we stop shill bidding scoundrels? That’s my question.

Regards,
Chris

And it has happened as I see some people tagged with shill bidding accusations. Whose to say its not still happening? To me thats the biggest concern.

I see your concern, it’s indeed a problem. Only bidding on auctions ran by well established members of the community, who state clear rules,  might be the only way to avoid this. As an example:
In the case of denarium I didn’t really have a problem with it, as I trust them not to shill bid. If you trust them with your private keys, you should also trust them for running a legit auction.

[JanEmil]

This rule work for me:

Only buy/bid if you think the price is good

If it smell fishy don't bid. More auctions will come.
If the seller have to pump an auction the product is not worth the money.

[Ticked]

  You would need a centralized authority such as ebay. 

as much as i like auctions here... and we certainly arent going ebay... BlockMarket may provide a solution

[Kryptowerk]

This rule work for me:

Only buy/bid if you think the price is good

If it smell fishy don't bid. More auctions will come.
If the seller have to pump an auction the product is not worth the money.

That's a nice perspective, but I feel it does not solve the core problem, that when suddenly one or two newbie accounts appear out of nowhere bidding up an auction, it will always leave an unpleasent taste for the other bidders. - Which can be harmful not only for the bidders but for the auction creator.

Personally I believe there is no way to fully solve this problem, but some basic measures that can help reduce it. I like to do the following in auctions:
- reserve the right to not accept bids from accounts with negative trust (if some of the previous bidders speaks out about it during auction, that would be a reason for me, or if I do some post/trust research about the bidder and get a bad feeling from it)
- a) ask for a pre-deposit to be made from new or inactive accounts OR b) exclude accounts that are too young or have too low of a rank OR c) have a minimum of copper membership - personally I would go (and have in the past) with the 2nd

But as Chris (BP) and Krogoth pointed out, to a certain degree it comes down to trust in the end. I personally feel hesitant to bid on auctions where I am worried shill-bidding might happen. So when I see a newbie account with a total of 9 posts suddenly making a bid of several $100 USD I am usually out - unless I have high trust in the auctioneer (because I know him/her personally or because I know someone personally that met that person and had a positive opinion about this person).
That's why I wouldn't want these accounts to bid on my auctions, too - I feel it harms the trust from the community too much, and as someone who loves to create crypto art, the last thing I would want is people having that same bad feeling I would get when seeing these 'suspicious' bids in one of my auctions.

Oh sorry, it's a long ramble.
Interested to see if someone comes up with a solution for the shill problem.

[krogothmanhattan]

This rule work for me:

Only buy/bid if you think the price is good

If it smell fishy don't bid. More auctions will come.
If the seller have to pump an auction the product is not worth the money.

That's a nice perspective, but I feel it does not solve the core problem, that when suddenly one or two newbie accounts appear out of nowhere bidding up an auction, it will always leave an unpleasent taste for the other bidders. - Which can be harmful not only for the bidders but for the auction creator.

Personally I believe there is no way to fully solve this problem, but some basic measures that can help reduce it. I like to do the following in auctions:
- reserve the right to not accept bids from accounts with negative trust (if some of the previous bidders speaks out about it during auction, that would be a reason for me, or if I do some post/trust research about the bidder and get a bad feeling from it)
- a) ask for a pre-deposit to be made from new or inactive accounts OR b) exclude accounts that are too young or have too low of a rank OR c) have a minimum of copper membership - personally I would go (and have in the past) with the 2nd

But as Chris (BP) and Krogoth pointed out, to a certain degree it comes down to trust in the end. I personally feel hesitant to bid on auctions where I am worried shill-bidding might happen. So when I see a newbie account with a total of 9 posts suddenly making a bid of several $100 USD I am usually out - unless I have high trust in the auctioneer (because I know him/her personally or because I know someone personally that met that person and had a positive opinion about this person).
That's why I wouldn't want these accounts to bid on my auctions, too - I feel it harms the trust from the community too much, and as someone who loves to create crypto art, the last thing I would want is people having that same bad feeling I would get when seeing these 'suspicious' bids in one of my auctions.

Oh sorry, it's a long ramble.
Interested to see if someone comes up with a solution for the shill problem.

Not a long ramble at all. Some very good points made.

I saw the same happen in the other auctions...newbies popped up out of nowhere. Not saying they were shill bidding...but it makes you think of the worse case scenario. Just my two Satoshi's

[A-10]

The last thing I would want to happen is limit somebody's ability to win an auction OR get the most value out of their auction. We were all newbies at one point. I hadn't been a member too long when I made my first auction win with a bid of 1.7BTC. However I did message the seller first. I'm sure the reason I was able to bid without any objection is because trust in the seller. I think that most anybody should be able to bid however if any reasonable objection is brought up I think that it would be beneficial to the seller to exclude their bids to keep in tact trust in their auctions. This means even in the middle of an auction changes to who could bid can be made. If guidelines are made for bidding they can just be referenced in their post as "Forum auction rules in effect" so you wouldn't have to type out everything each and every time. These rules would be pinned to the top of the page.

As far as shill bidding, I have seen accounts come out of nowhere that I've been inactive for years and then go dormant again after the auction with no trust given or received to the winner or seller. The problem is you just don't know with all certainty that is the case. And to levy such accusations should not be taken lightly. The only way I see any resolution is if any doubts are brought up it would be up to the seller to distinguish the doubt by not making their bids valid and reverting back to the previous valid bid. This does not solve the problem but at least it calls attention to the sellers auction and and gives pause to other bidders.

[Hhampuz]

As ognasty mentioned we'd have to crack down hard on the people that have been proven to shill bid or host unfair auctions. As long as everyone keeps on accepting it there's no point in arguing about how to handle newbie accounts. After all, I assume the main issue is that we believe the newbies to be shill bidders, correct?