@JAAJ @anon73693188 @SammyG @Powren @Alex @anon3411921 @Nice2knowU @Maoshan_Wanderer @Zen @Psimindset @DR_MANHATTAN and anyone else that would like their input since i don’t know everyone who may want to share
This is a tricky bit to nail down. I appreciate your diligence in this. 
I can delete this in a bit so it doesn’t mess up your thread.
You’re fine. Just take your time. This is a 1 time deal so lets make it count
Ohh i hadnt seen this, and strange that nobody has commented maybe it was hidden, ill read and get back to give feedback and thank you for all you do!
The punctual part can be hard, since there are so many locations/time zones that ppl are operating from. Knowing that someone responds promptly to an ad is nice, but in this case not always practical.
Maybe we can encourage people to add “Timezone” info as a note for the poll? Or possibly country of origin? country / location may be too intrusive in privacy so timezone may be better
good to go
but be careful of manipulation of vote
for example person create several accounts to vote for someone just who he can mess around
something that can protect against this too but showing how older their profile is or what trust level they’ve reached i mean for voters
not a problem when people read this
Hello, just seeing this. I will give feedback soon after work. Thank you 
The fair pricing is technically very subjective. What’s fair to me might be horrendous for someone else. (The pirates for example deem zero a fair price).
I think my only comment would be that the polls should have both reasons:
First poll:
1- trusted
2- not trusted
3- trusted but some issues
2nd poll (why) and we can choose up to 4 options not limited to 2:
1- Puntual
2- Responsive
3- Fair Price (this shouldnt be an option, anyone can ask for whatever they feel like, i pointed out about one member the other day because offering for higher price a NFT that is still for sale on the stores, that i still believe is sketchy however its peoples responsibility to check the main thread of x NFT to see if its still a public one and what the price is before buying from someone else)
4- Secure
Then 2nd part of the why, why + just marking is enough
But (when feedback is negative):
1- Puntual (received the money or the NFT, did not send theirs right away -this in the case both were talking about doing the transaction right at that moment and then the other part disappeared or took hours to send theirs, or came out with the “i dont know why is not sending its stuck on a loop” because while that can be real, at this point everybody should know that when that happens it means they dont have enough SOL, it should be something they have to talk and show proof (screen shoot) that they have enough before sending anything)
2- Responsive (only mark it when they had the loop issue mentioned above or Paypal/wise etc confirmation and did not pursuit solving the issue right away or soon enough) but not because it took hours to reply if yes or not, said were interested but then didnt reply to finish the deal etc, because tho it shows good character if done properly, it shouldnt go as far as being marked as possible untrusted person to do deals with, unfortunately sales or trades of any kind commonly encounter that situation, plus difference of time zones and busy schedules etc.
3- Fair Price (again no, unless suddenly the price goes up while discussing via PM, or if the person is pestering for a lower price)
4- Secure (well, the transaction failed, or if the transaction went through then they changed their mind and want to undo the deal)
As for who votes for who, i do agree in votes of positive character (so long time forum members can vote for x y person even if they havent done any transactions, still under their responsibility to vote with care) other than those i think it should exclusively be people that have done deals AND that can still show proof of correct transaction (older back and forth messages etc) in case of any issue arises, or in case the person that is unsure of dealing with someone can PM asking for proofs yes only vote for someone if you are willing to send proofs etc 
i think its the only way we avoid people voting + just to support untrusting people/scammers/thieves
And same for the - votes. Can only vote if you have proof of said option showing failure to deliver and finish a transaction. Otherwise no, so that erases the possibility of people just being mean, petty or looking to stop a transaction just so they or their friends can trade/sell instead.
Also maybe, to avoid people replying to x person re a transaction, should just vote and then go to the scammer post and link the person offering then make whatever comment if negative WITH proof.
I was going to write but @anon73693188 pretty much summed up what I was thinking so I agree with him.
A quick note for anyone having the idea(s) of adding more ‘middleman’ / third party trade into this topic
Here are posts relating to the topic with thoughts / opinions on the matter
Scam / Counterfeit Reports Thread for Sapien Medicine - #32 by Divine_Lotus
Keep in mind that Sammy has been quite busy nowadays so be mindful that such a system may or may not be implemented. Depends on Sam and Dream for the decision making
And a similar idea
Forum Ideas/Feedback/Suggestions - #188 by JAAJ
Also if you have criticism for ‘marketing’ on the matter in relation to promoting services
Google and Microsoft have built in two-factor authentication. This could certainly be used on the initial sales, so that one could always access lost audio files, in the same way that people retrieve lost passwords.
Perhaps after a subsequent sale, there can be an automatic update to the two factor identification, with the NFT in the wallet counting as a factor, so that the unattached audio file can be accessed in the event of seller failure or simply to account for the loss of a file—hard drive crash, for instance.
As to securing a successful transfer of cash for NFTs—I take a look at the Microsoft/Google tech more deeply later. There’s also may be an approach with blockchain QRs, but at a certain point your just recreating an exchange,
i think we can start implementing badges for the most well known members and slowly add new people by asking those well known members who they had traded with in the past, and so on, bcz the badges create awareness for the newbies who get curious about it and we can slowly increase the number of people. the 2nd poll is not needed right now we can maybe add it later based on user reviews.
right now we need speed of execution, as we know a few got scammed in the past weeks. So please roll out the badge system to the known trusted members: for new users we can have no past trades as their badge or something similar.
On a side note, has anyone used escrow.com before for a transcation, they charge 20 bucks i think. maybe that can be an option or we can just be the middle man with a 5 or 10 $ fee to whoever the trusted member that is online.
I like some version of an Escrow solution. It would ensure delivery of the NFT for the money. The problem is the audio file. The buyer doesn’t have a good description of it and there’s no way to verify it (not talking about the early Venly NFTs) unless one is an original member of the group (for private NFTs.) Public NFTs have the same problem, but there are many more who could verify characteristics of the audio file. (I’m not suggesting that most people would send a bad audio file. I’m simply saying the escrow company couldn’t do its job. , but the escrow company couldn’t do its job.
The solution would be an audio file bank, where the NFT could used to unlock the audio, which would remove the issue from the escrow company.
Short of that, you’re back to a trust system.
Ok so where is the thread where we can do these polls or? I didn’t sleep much and all that was confusing 
Anyways my votes go to @Sonata and @Kaworu02
They may not be very active in the forum right now. I never engaged with them before (or after). But I bought from them and everything went nice. I didn’t even have the wallet back then and they were patient while I made them. I requested an invoice from Sonata and she made it too.
So yeah, thanks for the patience guys. Hope the tag doesn’t bother you but it is for others to find you (and now even if you change your username they can).
Need to keep in mind on long term use. The less we rely on external services that are not our own in this regard, the better to keep ourselves from being dependent on something that can shut down
The badge system in terms of forum software… the issue is currently we can only use the forum software as it is right now. In other words, we keep it at its original state unless otherwise
Basically new rules for this is this:
Votes whether positive or negative are valid only if…
How does one do that? For the votes
We’re trying to keep it simple
Elaborate?
What else should be mandatory?
Wallet addresses? Security concerns arise. (I’m still new to crypto)
Or should they be added to the rules as
Quick Notes:
Something like…
Did we miss anything else?
Meaning if someone sees a member posting offers or buying and they had a bad experience with said person, instead of replying on the buy and sell thread and turn the thread into a back and forth derail, they should just vote - and then come to the scammer post, quote the offer of the allegedly scammer plus proof as to not being reliable
Hello
There’s this new thread for successful trades, and
It felt noobish to write my request there, so I write it here instead:
I would sincerely appreciate it if my name could be removed/ not mentioned in the posts, please.
Thanks!