[Hackers]

I would like to make a suggestion that for vendors, a contract is 100% required. My suggestion is that auto buy, offsite sales, etc would not be allowed in sales threads. Instead, only a contract button would be available.

I am suggesting this for a few reasons:
- Vendors are a special, professional HF group that deserves the protection of contracts for 100% of sales
- Customers deserve the protection of contracts
- Increased contract usage promotes the safety of the site
- Banning the display of autobuy links/buttons or instructions to buy offsite will increase contract usage

Overall I do think it should be a rule that everyone must follow, but for vendors specifically I think it makes a lot of sense because they are a higher caliber of seller and can lead the way as honest sellers.

---

Option 2:
Allow autobuy links, but a contract would be required upfront in order to use it.
Using contract templates or other logic, once contract is started the user is presented with an autobuy link.

[Nostre]

Contracts No Longer Required

Always encourage the use of contracts, especially toward the new members.

[Hackers]

Contracts No Longer Required

Always encourage the use of contracts, especially toward the new members.

Definitely a great thing to encourage the use of contracts, and understand it used to be a strict rule.
My suggestion is that to be a Vendor, you are required to use contracts once again. Contracts on HF are an incredible feature and I know many vendors who use them frequently. I think this would be a great improvement to the site. Vendors can lead the way on how to properly conduct business & others will follow.

[Nostre]

Definitely a great thing to encourage the use of contracts, and understand it used to be a strict rule.
My suggestion is that to be a Vendor, you are required to use contracts once again. Contracts on HF are an incredible feature and I know many vendors who use them frequently. I think this would be a great improvement to the site. Vendors can lead the way on how to properly conduct business & others will follow.

If you were a Vendor, you would understand how silly this sounds.

[Hackers]

They pay the $100 for a reason, to be able to link the auto buy, (off site) and to have unlimited thread edits.

Why limit it now when users have already paid the bill to join and have this feature.

I hear that & can understand that - I wasn't aware that the autobuy links was a perk that vendors were upgrading for specifically.
What if there was an autobuy link that also triggered a contract creation via webhook? not saying that's easy to do, but just curious what your thoughts would be if autobuy was available AND a contract was created for each sale.

[Hackers]

I typically always use contracts I don’t ever do any sketch shit where I’d feel the need to not use one. At the same time I do a lot of deals and some come from hf some don’t but all typically start from offsite. I can’t say I go out of my way to bring the deal on site, but I can say if it starts on site it has a contract and remains on site.

---

To add to that idk nom bout the webhook idea, to far over my head

makes sense, and agree with what you said.
For webhook it would basically be like:

- auto buy site processes a sale
- upon successful transaction, it sends data to a new HF API that creates a contract between two UIDs & starts it

a webhook just means:
"when Event is complete, send a HTTP request to another website/API to let it know the Event is complete"

I think it would be a lot of effort to implement securely, but was just wondering.
- it would also limit sellers to using autobuy platforms that have webhook options available.

[Komodo]

I don’t totally agree but you’re also single handily running the deal dispute section right now.

What’s the ratio of vendor deal disputes to the rest? I feel I see way more Uber / leet than I do vendors in the DD section.

[Hackers]

I don’t totally agree but you’re also single handily running the deal dispute section right now.

What’s the ratio of vendor deal disputes to the rest? I feel I see way more Uber / leet than I do vendors in the DD section.

Haha, I don't think I am running DD section...
I would say the vendor role is respectable and this suggestion is primarily to increase contract usage and have vendors lead the way in general. The current system is perfectly fine for avoiding any issues because buyers are encouraged to use contracts and have the option to. If you see a Vendor title, you know you can trust them to fulfill the service/product, so I hope this thread is not being interpreted as a dig on vendors. I'm sure the dispute to successful deal ratio is probably as good as 0.0000001% disputes or something, possibly being less than the average ecomm site's refunds, but I don't have any stats on this and haven't looked into this angle at all.

Idk if I’d use it tbh, then it’s just like bringing every person who purchased off my auto buy to this site, (which isn’t bad per say) but then if they found me from a different site clicked my auto link there and it send the contract stuff here I think it would be conflict.

true, would require 2 diff links. you're right about that flaw.

[Skorp]

Dont you think your suggestion might hurt Marketplace activity? As what you wrote in the OP may be safer, having freedom as a seller usually has its many positive benefits.

[Scrubspoof]

There is absolutely nothing wrong with the way things are.

[StuffSneak]

People have paid for this upgrade in order to save much time for all transactions. Contracts are always encouraged & there is always a contract button on all market threads automatically. If buyer wants to, they can always use contracts. I haven't came across anyone who says they don't want to use contracts.

You need to understand, most V3ndors are people who operate on larger scale than just HF. They paid for the upgrade to have these features & not look back at stuff daily. They have set up their autobuy sites in order to expedite their operation. At least I did the upgrade for that reason. If a buyer wants to open contract, nobody denies that anyway.

[LaDullahan]

I'm a noob I don't really have a say here, but lets say for a second I was on the marketplace looking for a good, or service. I would feel much safer if they were required to have a contract for every sale, however this is just my opinion. I'll stay posted to see how this turns out. It's VERY interesting.

[Hackers]

People have paid for this upgrade in order to save much time for all transactions. Contracts are always encouraged & there is always a contract button on all market threads automatically. If buyer wants to, they can always use contracts. I haven't came across anyone who says they don't want to use contracts.

You need to understand, most V3ndors are people who operate on larger scale than just HF. They paid for the upgrade to have these features & not look back at stuff daily. They have set up their autobuy sites in order to expedite their operation. At least I did the upgrade for that reason. If a buyer wants to open contract, nobody denies that anyway.

Do you think it would be acceptable if it was still autobuy, but a contract was auto started before the autobuy link was given to the buyer?

[Jamika]

I would like to make a suggestion that for vendors, a contract is 100% required. My suggestion is that auto buy, offsite sales, etc would not be allowed in sales threads. Instead, only a contract button would be available.

I am suggesting this for a few reasons:
- Vendors are a special, professional HF group that deserves the protection of contracts for 100% of sales
- Customers deserve the protection of contracts
- Increased contract usage promotes the safety of the site
- Banning the display of autobuy links/buttons or instructions to buy offsite will increase contract usage

Overall I do think it should be a rule that everyone must follow, but for vendors specifically I think it makes a lot of sense because they are a higher caliber of seller and can lead the way as honest sellers.

---

Option 2:
Allow autobuy links, but a contract would be required upfront in order to use it.
Using contract templates or other logic, once contract is started the user is presented with an autobuy link.

I dont think they will agree, they pay to sell whatever they want the way they want, that what differ them from other upgrade

[Omniscient]

You're not even a Vendor. I think you want rules on a group that you're not a part of. What you're proposing is the exact opposite of the reasons to be a Vendor. Vendors are the only group actually allowed to link to autobuy sites. It's likel the #1 reason that they upgrade into the group. No one would want to upgrade into the group under your scenario. I'd be forced to reinstate the Contracts Only policy and require them 100% of the time for everyone. I did that, it was okay but I don't believe it was popular with sellers.

What if there was an autobuy link that also triggered a contract creation via webhook?

They can already do that with the API. Unfortunately it's not really used by any Vendors that I'm aware of. Potentially after we upgrade our backend maybe the API can be improved.

if autobuy was available AND a contract was created for each sale

Sure, but we're not there yet. Not sure we ever will be. The best would be if HF had an official Autobuy site partner with actual integration with Contracts. To me that's the best way to improve the whole setup.

but then if they found me from a different site clicked my auto link there and it send the contract stuff here I think it would be conflict.

From a technical standpoint that's why HF would need the Autobuy site to have HF integration directly. HF would send the call first to them, they'd respond after payment was made, Contract would get marked accordingly. Otherwise, how it is now, the Vendor has to be the go-between and code both ends from the middle. I know you're not tech savvy so I'm trying to explain it in a way I think you'd understand.

You need to understand, most V3ndors are people who operate on larger scale than just HF. They paid for the upgrade to have these features & not look back at stuff daily. They have set up their autobuy sites in order to expedite their operation. At least I did the upgrade for that reason. If a buyer wants to open contract, nobody denies that anyway.

Correct, it's not uncommon for a Vendor to not be on HF for a week or more but they use their Stickies to advertiser their Autobuy sites. The Vendor Contract Templates do most of the work. It's fairly automated for them.

I would feel much safer if they were required to have a contract for every sale

You can tell any seller that you want an HF Contract. It's not yet policy, but I'm fairly close to officially saying that anyone refusing an HF Contract to do a deal on HF is subject to being CLOSED. I see no reason why anyone should refuse to do a Contract. I haven't yet because far as I know, it's rare that people refuse a Contract.