If there was one thing craigslist could improve on, it would be managing the spam listings. I think we all can close our eyes and imagine how these listings look: dozens and dozens of identical listings on a single point on a map about some scam used car loan, or an apartment that doesn't actually exist, or stolen playstations. If its so easy for us regular craiglist users to see this spam and subconsciously tune it out, then why is it such a hard problem for the craiglist developers to establish what I would guess are pretty trivial filters to set up to catch these listings that I stress again are posted dozens and dozens of times identically over the years? Seems they have tacitly acknowledge the issue with the hide duplicates checkbox, but why even have the user need to check that at all? I don't think anyone wants to see duplicate spam.
My bugaboo is people who list things for sale and fill $1 as the price in the structured data, and then in the description reveal the real price they are asking. All just so when I filter by price their listing still shows up.
You can manually flag things but it feels like whack-a-mole, and I don't know if Craigslist actually deletes/punishes posters who get flagged for this reason.
Mine are the used car dealers that have every make and model ever created (or maybe just the 1500 most popular) in every description. On cars that aren't even close.
So even if you're looking for a 1999 Honda Civic, every car for sale by Bill's automotive or whoever shows up as a description containing that text.
I stopped selling on Craiglist b/c EVERY SINGLE TIME I posted something I immediately started getting the "hi! I'm moving so I'm going to send the movers with a check that includes their pay and the balance to pick up your item" scam.
At least on Facebook Marketplace, I can see who the person is, do they have a rating, do they know anyone I know etc etc.
Maybe interestingly, my experience has been the exact reverse of this. Craigslist is the only place I get legitimate responses to my listings, and Facebook Marketplace is where I get people who try to pull of these scams, or people who want to pay half of the price I list. I wonder if it has to do with the types of items being sold?
I've sold things to real people on Craigslist, for cash. The scammers are easy to filter out, but I'm sure there are smarter ones out there whom I just haven't encountered yet.
They do warn you about scammers, and my feeling is that if they tried to filter out the vermin who say "my agent will arrive with a cashier's check to pick it up" the scammers would just find some way around it, and people would get a false sense of security to boot. Whack-a-mole games, in other words.
A site for discussion would be Discogs, where I've had almost nothing but great experiences: all nice, honest people. Maybe the fix for Craigslist would be to split into verticals, where a community could develop, something that's absent now.
> At least on Facebook Marketplace, I can see who the person is, do they have a rating, do they know anyone I know etc etc.
I don't want that when I sell random stuff out of my house. I want to meet a random dude at a gas station, exchange cash, and never know anything about each other again.
Great way of seeing it. While I don't like being on Facebook, I now almost always tend towards it over Kijiji (Canadian alternative) and Craigslist for the reputation system.
Your experience is the opposite of mine. FB Marketplace is 100% scammers as best as I can tell. I've never had success. Also, never ever ever buy a product advertised on Facebook. Chinese scammers outright lie about the products and there are zero customer protections.
Craigslist on the other hand has generally been alright, although it is better to be a buyer than a seller. Most of the time I've had someone flake or ghost me they were a buyer.
We've had trouble selling on Facebook marketplace. On craiglist, if people don't like your list price they just ignore you. On facebook people can start flamewars in your posts or harass you directly.
Other people have had trouble selling as well because of Facebook's moderation system.
A coworker's son participated in a high school archery team as a sophomore, then lost interest. My coworker listed the equipment on Marketplace, but after a day his listing was flagged for selling weapons.
He requested an appeal: the school has a zero tolerance policy for 'weapons' but allows students to carry their archery gear. By this reasoning, the listing should be fine, but Facebook's reviewer disagreed and banned him from marketplace for life.
I have an "Intelligent Human Turing Test" when I sell things on Craigslist (usually professional/pro-sumer music/audio equipment). If someone doesn't pass it I don't respond. If they do they are generally thrilled to be getting a real deal on gear that's in the shape it's been described. This has worked in the greater SF Bay area through good and bad economic times over the last 20+ years.
"In person, cash transactions ONLY, no shipping or trades. Scammers will be ignored.
Prices are firm, please don't respond if you don't understand what that means - I monitor markets daily on (CL, eBay, Reverb, XYZ music sites), here are links to recent similar condition gear sold for $xxx more.
Respond with a phone # and 2-3 times this week that work for you to talk or meet."
At my work some of our best employees (including myself!) were found through Craigslist. And as a hiring manager, CL ofter brings me better applicants than Zip Recruiter, Indeed, Idealist and other "mass application spam cannons" HR inexplicably favors that have made being a hiring manager a real PITA in the last 5 years.
> At my work some of our best employees (including myself!) were found through Craigslist
I had a co-worker in the pas who met his wife on Craigslist.
Most people assume this happened via the personals/missed connection sections but apparently it was b/c he saw a comment of hers on the forum section, messaged her to say he thought it was funny and the rest is history.
France must be one of the last countries to still use cheques and they are often refused, but at least there is a reasonable threat for the account owners whose cheque would not clear.
It's a very common scam to send a cashier's check for an amount + some extra, where you are expected to cash the check, keep the change, and return the amount. Later, the check will reverse, having been caught as a fraudulent check, and you're left on the hook for the entire original amount of the check.
Just so everyone knows -- you should always be able to call the issuing bank to verify the legitimacy of a cashier's check. They can confirm whether the check exists for the given check number, date, and amount, and that it has not been cashed. (Also, Google the phone number for the bank, don't use a phone number listed on the check itself.)
This is what makes cashier's checks fairly scam-free if you know that.
(Also remember, this is about cashier's checks, not ordinary personal checks.)
Of course this does require that you make your buyer wait while you phone the bank (and possibly do this during bank business hours), get put on hold, etc. And deal with the social discomfort of so obviously not trusting them. And then the risk of what might happen afterwards once you discover they are trying to scam you -- do they just go away or do they get violent or something?
But if you tell them upfront that you'll be calling to verify the check when you meet, it's much more comfortable. Especially because if they're trying to pull the scam, they'll just give up and not meet in the first place.
(Oh, and obviously never accept extra payment and then separately refund a difference. That's scam avoidance 101. If they even suggest that, stop talking to them.)
In some sense it’s actually a genius answer to the spam arms race: refuse to participate. This way, the spam is immediately obvious. In the proposed word where sophisticated spam detection algorithms are built, the adversary develops sophisticated spamming techniques that become difficult for even an experienced user to detect.
Why no arms race in this theory though? If spam is sure to ratchet up to meet whatever defense craigslist has today in order to continue to be effective, they might as well do a better job today as it is to not make themselves stand out so explicitly so they can get a higher click through rate. Seems to me there is some underlying reason or incentive why the current arms race on the half of the spammers might be stalled. Maybe there are enough people who fall for these scams as low effort as they seem to day, but if that were the case then craigslist is being a bit unethical allowing this susceptible population to be routinely victimized to ensure the rest of us don't get fooled by tougher spam.
There's also the theory that obvious scams and spam is helpful to adversaries because it filters out people who will realize it's a scam later and not follow through. Like, making the Nigerian Prince emails more convincing might lead to more work for little to no new real leads because these new people that were slightly less gullible are more likely to realize it's a scam later on too.
Because the content hasn’t been filtered. If the adversary attempts to make a post and is prohibited from doing so (or is unable to see their post on a different browser/etc.), they will try harder to make the post “sneaky”.
On the other hand if they make a post, see the post, open their phone, see the post there (tons of times! how effective!), they move on with their day.
There are also legit but over zealous listings. There are apartment complexes that re-post the listings every single day. So, checking if any new apartments appear is always manually filtering over 40% the apartments you've already looked at but which were reposted.
This drives me crazy. I have saved searches for various power tools within a few hundred mile radius. Most of what I see are duplicate posts from people cross-posting in adjacent regions, the same items re-posted weekly (or more frequently), and irrelevant listings that show up due to keyword spamming. I wish there was a way for me to say "I've seen this ad, don't send it to me again unless the price drops". Have been thinking about building some kind of filtering software to eliminate re-posts -- anyone know of a project that does this?
Right now I feel like the economics of AI/LLMs are in the spammers favour. You're almost suggesting that AIs be trained to recognise other AIs. Don't misunderstand, I think it would be great if we could opt to have all AI or auto-generated content removed from our internet experience. It's just not really in the interest of the shareholders.
The best thing I've seen in a long time is the "Say potato" tactic against bots, not sure how well it works against LLMs though.
For car sales, they started charging to post. It's worked wonderfully and now most ads are from serious sellers with fully fleshed out posts and who are responsive.
To me, this is the obvious answer. Posting an ad is clearly worth some small cost to a legitimate seller. For spammers, it's a much bigger impediment, and it also establishes a money trail to who they are.
As a visitor, the downside to ignoring anything that even smells of spam is very low. You might miss out on the occasional real post. If you're Craigslist, every false positive is a headache. User complaints, support costs, vetting, bad publicity.
Craigslist really nails practical and boring design. There have been countless small updates and improvements in functionality and appearance without falling victim to passing fads.
I do wish it was more streamlined to create a listing directly in the category you're currently viewing.
Ah, a chance to wheel out one of my favourite quotes ever.
> Jim Buckmaster, the chief executive of Craigslist, caused lots of head-scratching Thursday as he tried to explain to a bunch of Wall Street types why his company is not interested in “monetizing” his ridiculously popular Web operation. Appearing at the UBS global media conference in New York, Mr. Buckmaster took questions from the bemused audience, which apparently could not get its collective mind around the notion that Craigslist exists to help Web users find jobs, cars, apartments and dates — and not so much to make money.
> Wendy Davis of MediaPost describes the presentation as a “a culture clash of near-epic proportions.” She recounts how UBS analyst Ben Schachter wanted to know how Craigslist plans to maximize revenue. It doesn’t, Mr. Buckmaster replied (perhaps wondering how Mr. Schachter could possibly not already know this). “That definitely is not part of the equation,” he said, according to MediaPost. “It’s not part of the goal.”
Craigslist's desire to invest in their reputation allow them to persist longer yet. Short term wins for income don't make the company a winner to customers.
> In 2018, Craigslist permanently shuttered its personal ads section following a federal amendment to Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, a bedrock piece of legislation that enabled early websites to flourish by removing liability for user-generated content.
https://LokiList.com provides a (somewhat more private) replacement for the lost Craigslist personals. Since websites are now liable for user's content, users can only post text. Users may include a Session Private Messenger ID in their post or share their preferred contact information in their post body.
I like the conspiracy theory that craigslist was cutting into the sex market by letting workers go direct without any middlemen. That law was passed to maintain the status quo.
I feel like I can't really trust anything on Craigslist now, so I don't really use it. I did post my furniture for free pickup on there last year, but that's been about it in the past ten years. I remembered it being pretty much dead from then, but I just checked it again and it seems to still be getting quite a few posts, so I guess that was just a false memory.
I also used to check it for software jobs way back in the day, and got a couple interviews from it, but that seems totally dead now. I see 5 postings in the software jobs section, and none of them are anywhere close to Chicago.
I just bought a fish tank off some guy on Craigslist a week ago, since I don't have a Facebook account to use Marketplace. He told me it was in good condition, and the pics looked ok but were from kind of far back and it was full of crap. I drive 45 min to get it and the thing is horrendously scratched up on the inside because he used it for turtles and then storage.
Falling victim to the sunk cost fallacy, since I drove all that way, I took it off his hands for 25% less than we initially agreed.
I did something similar with an Aeron chair on Facebook Marketplace recently. Drove around an hour to the next city over to take a look at one, apparently the good ones had been picked over already (and he only posted photos of one out of the batch, presumably the best), but I felt a little obligated to buy something since I'd taken the person's time and driven all that way.
After cleaning it up at home, it ended up being usable for now, but definitely felt crappy driving back with it knowing I wasn't really happy with it.
I tried buying a truck. Every seller would say "totally rust free!!111" and promise there wasn't a dot of rust. I'd get there and practically every time I managed to push a finger or a fist through a panel.
Despite Facebook Marketplace, Craigslist is still great for most typical local classifieds. Furniture, bicycles, motorcycles, cars, musical instruments, electronics, garage/estate sales, etc. And it's wide open: you don't have to participate in someone's walled garden to read, respond or post.
The fact that its simple -- some would say ugly; I simply think "utilitarian" -- design has endured with very little change for two decades has a lot to teach about UI and graphic design.
chucking a platform onto the internet without a form of high touch maintenance of the community is I think what causes social media to die. Its very difficult to buy on craigslist for the reasons other commenters have mentioned.
craigslist is dead, the news should be how marketplace quietly disrupted craigslist and the power of Meta integrating any product. if you're a B2C company and Meta decides to compete with you, you have no chance.
I logged in just to respond to this - I could not disagree more. FB's faceted search is truly awful. I regularly search for specific items on FB and get totally different results if I run the same query multiple times. Sometimes, I'll even get "suggested" items that 100% match my search query and have been posted for weeks but still don't appear in my original search.
I loathe using FBMP, but it has been slowly absorbing all the CL traffic. On one hand, I like that CL charges for high value items now (ex: Cars) because it means you're getting better quality, but on the other hand it has absolutely hastened people's abandonment of CL for FBMP.
Maybe I have a different perspective, but I find both platforms to be absolutely awful. I had to find a car with CL years ago ... uggh, what a shite platform.
Now - FB is decidedly worse though. These walled gardens, I swear the spartan simplicity of Usenet was better than these.
I have no problem with them dying, since they're as responsible for the elimination of funding of quality journalism in the US as much as any other entity on the planet. Not that they planned for it to happen, but it's still largely their fault.
I saw a story on HN the other day about how NYC hotels are more expensive following an Airbnb ban.
Back in the mid-2000s, Craigslist was Airbnb in NY. I never stayed at a hotel when I visited. There were always rooms and apartments available to rent, especially on weekends. In 2008, I booked a ground-floor apartment in Brooklyn for $80/night for myself and some college friends.
I miss that era. Airbnb reminds me of the Jobs quote about Dropbox: it's a feature, not a product. Craigslist did lots of things, that's what was great about it. It specifically eschewed the Silicon Valley ethos of trying to turn a side hustle into an IPO, and the mass regulation-skirting that involves.
CL intentionally flew under the radar, and thus never created a situation where where investors and speculators reduced the supply of rental/for-sale housing to create inventory for Airbnb. With CL, we could have good things that didn't get enshittified as soon as the VC play money dried up.
Alright, but what's the actual best minimalist social media?
I'm so fed up with Meta/X and while Reddit is decent, it's no way to connect with friends or carry on conversations that last longer than 2 hours.
I'm convinced that many people feel this way, and while I'm sure there will be a big "don't reinvent the wheel" response here, convincing mom, grandma, and that guy from high school to make and maintain a blog/website/rss feed is a no go in reality.
(And yes, I and my imaginary cohort are ready and willing to pay a monthly fee!!)
What is decent exists: FMS with Web of Trust moderating, on Freenet/Hyphanet. It's 4chan style anyone-can-post with non-destructive subscription-based moderation.
I think all you really need is decent universal chat. Not our current siloed ecosystem with 15 different chat systems run by 8 different companies, none compatible with each other. But a truly universal chat system: like E-mail where you can E-mail anyone no matter what their ISP, computer manufacturer or phone manufacturer is.
That would be a good step, and I see how that allows for everyone to remain in the marketing cesspool of their choosing. But as for myself, I want "posts" and a customizable feed. Without the ads and attention-maximizing bs.
If you just want a feed of stuff where you choose who to subscribe to, where you can like and comment, no ads, and that's about it... that's Mastodon. If you want more topic-organized threads, that's Lemmy. There's not many people on the fediverse relative to mainstream social media, but there's enough for it have the Craigslist/usenet/BBS feeling.
