Discogs - Help, Tricks, Secrets And Tips

so there's this French seller who sent me a different variant of the record I ordered (different color, less sought after, and about $30 cheaper). I asked them about a possibility of a partial refund (no answer), I thought about keeping the record I got since all of its variants are quite rare (but, as it turned out, it sounds like garbage) and finally had to request a full refund. 8 days later the seller finally replied - in barely comprehensible English - that the record is "beautiful" and sounds "perfect" and that I "made a mistake" since they sent me "exactly" what I ordered. I repeatedly asked for their email to send them the pictures to prove that it's not me who made a mistake (no answer) and I haven't even questioned their grading (it was listed as NM, it's VG+ at best). judging by our communication so far, I'm genuinely worried about sending the record back without a) some sort of acknowledgment from the seller that I didn't get what I ordered and b) a tracking number (and the cheapest Canada Post option with tracking is about 75CAD). any advice?
 
Don’t send it back without getting PayPal or your credit card involved and following their specific instructions on how and when to return the item.

PayPal does offer up to $30 each year to offset return shipping costs for customers but you may need to manually enroll in that program prior to placing the order (Google PayPal return shipping refund).

If I were you, I’d call your credit card company and explain the situation and the international shipping wrinkle and see if they have some recourse that will help you avoid losing $$$ to get your original payment back.
 
djdavedk said:
When I sell a sealed record, it’s presumed mint.
Click to expand...

If I sell a sealed record, I list it as NM/NM and note that this is a sealed copy. I can point you toward Seasick Records that have a whole section of "damaged" brand new LP's that have a markdown- you would be pressed to find a reason it's damaged, but there is just enough imperfection that, according to the owner, would give these nitpickers enough ground to say it's not Mint. Talking about tiny corner dings, slight ringwear, etc.

The old adage is "there is no such thing as Mint" and those were the days before Buyer Guarantees and chargebacks. If you ship something new and sealed, and if it arrives with any amount of defect that it could be considered NM instead of M, that could be used against you. And yeah, those people exist.

I just always say that there are no refunds on items that ship sealed and it scares away most of the nerds that don't want to fight a war on two fronts.
 
TheThinWhiteDuke said:
If I sell a sealed record, I list it as NM/NM and note that this is a sealed copy. I can point you toward Seasick Records that have a whole section of "damaged" brand new LP's that have a markdown- you would be pressed to find a reason it's damaged, but there is just enough imperfection that, according to the owner, would give these nitpickers enough ground to say it's not Mint. Talking about tiny corner dings, slight ringwear, etc.

The old adage is "there is no such thing as Mint" and those were the days before Buyer Guarantees and chargebacks. If you ship something new and sealed, and if it arrives with any amount of defect that it could be considered NM instead of M, that could be used against you. And yeah, those people exist.

I just always say that there are no refunds on items that ship sealed and it scares away most of the nerds that don't want to fight a war on two fronts.
Click to expand...
I also put up imgur links to everything I sell. Even if it is sealed and mint (i.e. no seam splits, damaged corners, etc.) I put pictures of its perfect state.

I also ship all used (i.e. open) records outside of the jacket (as a good seller should) to avoid any seam splits. I put a specific note in my seller terms that anything sealed will be opened and have the record removed to ship outside of the jacket at the buyer's request; and that if they do not choose this option, that I will not be responsible for any seam splits in transit (again, I'll have photos to back up and show the buyer that it did not leave me with seam splits; of course, I will note if any sealed items do have splits or damage and grade accordingly). Furthermore, after purchases I send a message to the buyer explicitly asking if they want the record opened and removed; some take me up on it and some do not. With the message, I also have receipts if the person rejected the service (or, accepted in the case that they would try to claim that it was supposed to arrive sealed).

Heck, I even have a note in my seller terms about heat-induced warping. I check every (opened) record before I sell it to make sure it sits flat on my table. I own a VinylFlat so chances are if it was at some point not flat, I'd already taken care of it. I make note that I do not control the temp (and, really, how long a person let's a record sit outside or in a box) and that, especially, in the hot months I cannot help if something gets warped from the heat. I figure that turns off some buyers, but I'm good with that.

Finally, I even put in my seller terms that it due diligence of the buyer to read Discog users' reviews or other sources regarding a pressing. That remaster muddy and compressed - cool, not my issue and it's still a NM or whatever pressing I sold you of a pressing you just not happen to like. Or, if tons of people are talking about surface noise on a GZ or URP pressing, well, then that's what a NM, etc. pressing sounds like for that particular one.. Again, something outside of my control.

Yes, my seller terms are quite long and I'm sure they turn off some buyers. However, I also price fairly, grade conservatively, insure expensive purchases at my own expense, pack with great care, communicate quickly with buyers, and almost always ship within a day. Because of this I have a 100% seller rating.

I'm not a high volume seller (usually just culling my collection), but out of ~100 sales on Discogs and ~50 on eBay over the years, I've only ever had one issue. A $60 record I sold (below my personal threshhold to insure) arrived to the buyer mangled. They sent me a photo and hadn't even opened the mailer because they were afraid to (they were a newer buyer and didn't know how this stuff worked). USPS definitely had a field day with it - I could see the record inside the mailer, it was so torn apart and bent. I immediately refunded the buyer for the full sale, told them to keep the record and hopefully the media played even if the jacket was trash, and took the "L" on that one. They were super appreciative of my response and left me positive feedback.

But why do I have a novel for seller terms? Cover my ass. A LOT of buyers are entitled and, unfortunately, PayPal creates a wholly asymmetric power dynamic.
 
ugh....I'm really tired of the stupid shit on Discogs.

I got hit with a Needs Minor Change vote because some user wants to know the pressing run of a release...something that wasn't even given out publicly.

www.discogs.com

SQÜRL - The Dead Don't Die

View credits, reviews, tracks and shop for the 2019 Vinyl release of "The Dead Don't Die" on Discogs.
www.discogs.com www.discogs.com
 
LeeVing said:
ugh....I'm really tired of the stupid shit on Discogs.

I got hit with a Needs Minor Change vote because some user wants to know the pressing run of a release...something that wasn't even given out publicly.

www.discogs.com

SQÜRL - The Dead Don't Die

View credits, reviews, tracks and shop for the 2019 Vinyl release of "The Dead Don't Die" on Discogs.
www.discogs.com www.discogs.com
Click to expand...
I noticed you didn't tag the person and they don't seem like the type that would go back to the release to view it. Which brings me to my question, do you get notified of comments if someone doesn't tag you?
 
Melt Face Molly Drop said:
I noticed you didn't tag the person and they don't seem like the type that would go back to the release to view it. Which brings me to my question, do you get notified of comments if someone doesn't tag you?
Click to expand...

I don't tag in the sub edit as it doesn't actually work. The last person to edit gets a "comment was made" message.

I was going to post in the ping thread if they don't respond in the sub.

I would assume that if they ask a question like that they would go back to see if anyone answered...but that gives them a bit too much credit...as they already showed they don't know the voting process.
 
LeeVing said:
ugh....I'm really tired of the stupid shit on Discogs.

I got hit with a Needs Minor Change vote because some user wants to know the pressing run of a release...something that wasn't even given out publicly.

www.discogs.com

SQÜRL - The Dead Don't Die

View credits, reviews, tracks and shop for the 2019 Vinyl release of "The Dead Don't Die" on Discogs.
www.discogs.com www.discogs.com
Click to expand...

genuine question because i do not know- how does that person's vote affect you?
 
AndySlash said:
genuine question because i do not know- how does that person's vote affect you?
Click to expand...

Any vote on a submission only goes against the user that made the last edit - (adding or making image edits don't count in voting)

The voting system sucks, but bad voting should still be called out.

As someone that has been on Discogs for a while, I can absorb this 1 low vote pretty easily - and because I posted it in the ping thread, I got more "Correct" votes after, so I came out ahead.


All this affects your "Contributor Stats"

Screenshot 2022-10-07 071513.jpg


Your "Vote Average" is a 1 to 5 rating system -

5 = Complete & Correct
4 = Correct
3 = Needs Minor Changes
2 = Needs Major Changes
1 = Entirely Incorrect

If this average dips below 3, you are put into "CIP" which is the Contributor Improvement Program. When on CIP you are limited to 3 edits at a time, having to wait for votes - if you have more pending subs, then you can't submit anything.

As someone with more than 1100 unvoted on edits, and that usually sits at or above the "4 = Correct" average vote, I'm not worried about going into CIP myself, but these bad votes happen all the time to other users that can't absorb a bad vote - and don't have the knowledge of going to the forums to get some assistance with a bad vote.


This is all what I've picked up reading the forums and being on Discogs for quite a while - I haven't been in CIP since I started, so I don't have any first hand knowledge of the process from the inside.
 
Last edited:
LeeVing said:
Any vote on a submission only goes against the user that made the last edit - (adding or making image edits don't count in voting)

The voting system sucks, but bad voting should still be called out.

As someone that has been on Discogs for a while, I can absorb this 1 low vote pretty easily - and because I posted it in the ping thread, I got more "Correct" votes after, so I came out ahead.


All this affects your "Contributor Stats"

View attachment 153451


Your "Vote Average" is a 1 to 5 rating system -

5 = Complete & Correct
4 = Correct
3 = Needs Minor Changes
2 = Needs Major Changes
1 = Entirely Incorrect

If this average dips below 3, you are put into "CIP" which is the Contributor Improvement Program. When on CIP you are limited to 3 edits at a time, having to wait for votes - if you have more pending subs, then you can't submit anything.

As someone with more than 1100 unvoted on edits, and that usually sits at or above the "4 = Correct" average vote, I'm not worried about going into CIP myself, but these bad votes happen all the time to other users that can't absorb a bad vote - and don't have the knowledge of going to the forums to get some assistance with a bad vote.


This is all what I've picked up reading the forums and being on Discogs for quite a while - I haven't been in CIP since I started, so I don't have any first hand knowledge of the process from the inside.
Click to expand...
Better you than me. I used to be a cataloguer when I first started out as a librarian, and when I say this is too much pfaffing about, that is a very high threshold hit.
 
interesting. thanks for sharing.

many many years ago in one of my first attempts at contributing i made several edits to a label discography to standardize the cat#s. the font that is used for these generally displays capital letters as lowercase (so MGXX can be viewed as mgXX) despite the label site and other mentions listing them as capitalized entries, and so i went through the several non-capitalized ones and adjusted them. someone took great offense to this and voted all of them EI and so I was in CIP hell right out of the gate. i know now that it's not unusual for newcomers to have this type of experience, but at the time i just went back in and reverted the changes to appease the discogs gods. sure enough, the label head comments much later on that all the cat#s should be capitalized and makes a couple edits of his own. meanwhile, i'm still stuck in purgatory for this one user's multiple EI votes. all of this really soured on me trying to contribute much if one person could just tank any effort by a user to contribute without having a reasonable discussion first. eventually i got out of CIP, i think i asked on the old forum for people to help out and vote on my submissions to do so. but it should never have gotten to that.

in a full on 'fuck it' approach today, i just went back in and made these same changes again (and updating a few newer ones), linking/noting the label heads comments that appeared in a discogs edit comment page about proper capitalization for their releases. i expect i'll get the same pushback from one or two users linking the guidelines as i did years ago, but if they can't understand that it's the font choice used that displays capitals as lowercase and the label head stating exactly how the cat# should be listed, then i give up. 90% of this label's (Moon Glyph) listings are correct, and the OCD in me has always been bothered by this discrepancy.

appreciate the explanation of the voting process. as i said, my experience definitely made me not want to provide anything there for quite awhile (and i was still limited even if i did). we'll see if i end up back in CIP again.

edit: i actually have a few outstanding submissions from the last couple years needing a vote- would anyone here be willing to go in and vote on these? https://www.discogs.com/user/AndySlash/submissions
 
Best to not "standardize" anything.

Discogs documents the releases...not how the label wants them to be.

If the cat # was lower case on the release, then it should be lower case on Discogs.

If the label wanted them to be in Caps, then they should have put them on the release that way.


Looking at a couple of the cassette releases, it does seem that it is printed as mg# - so that is what should be entered on the submission, despite what the label says.
 
Last edited:
i understand that. but it's a font choice that i think is independent of that. it's not like the label head went into their artwork design thinking 'what would discogs users say?'. that cat# is capitalized regardless of the font, and this is what the label specifically wants and indicated on discogs, and their releases have been for the most part entered into that database as, save for around ten entries of a ~120 count discography.

i hate that were arguing capitalization. but the guidelines are sometimes just too rigid to account for reality. it makes absolutely no sense for the label to specifically state 'these our our cat#s' and discogs to be 'no, you're wrong'.
 
AndySlash said:
i understand that. but it's a font choice that i think is independent of that. it's not like the label head went into their artwork design thinking 'what would discogs users say?'. that cat# is capitalized regardless of the font, and this is what the label specifically wants and indicated on discogs, and their releases have been for the most part entered into that database as, save for around ten entries of a ~120 count discography.

i hate that were arguing capitalization. but the guidelines are sometimes just too rigid to account for reality. it makes absolutely no sense for the label to specifically state 'these our our cat#s' and discogs to be 'no, you're wrong'.
Click to expand...

I get what you are saying - but if Discogs had to listen to what every label wants, it would be a lot crazier.

Discogs isn't saying 'no, you're wrong' - it is just documenting what is on the release. Those cassettes have "mg" - so that is how they should be documented.

Labels have recently seen Discogs as another way to market their Discography and think they should have their own control over it, but that's just not how it works. The guidelines are there for everyone - including the labels/artists to use.
 
Last edited:
i understand the guidelines here. but these should be true guidelines for entries and not rigid directives- there should be allowed some nuance and in situations like these where it is clear what the intent is directly from the person that runs the label these should absolutely be considered. that's what's frustrating about this, because if we go the route that the guideline is a rigid directive, then about 120 of the 128 moon glyph entries need to be changed to show mgXX if discogs wants this to be enforced universally. starting with MG120, the spine labels are different and used standard capitalized letters so should be clearer going forward. and i believe the old font used is capitalized letters, too, it's just that font choice that makes it appear lowercase, similar to using a copperplate gothic font that has lowercase letters that appear capitalized.

i shouldn't have used 'standardized' here- i realize that just red flags the comment right away for the reader and pretty much undermines my intent. i do firmly believe i am trying to do the right thing here in creating accuracy in the listings. discogs may yet disagree, and that's fine, i'll suffer the consequences.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top