Require Marketplace Method Sellers To Show Earning Proofs

[463]

I want to start off by saying I'm guilty of this. I have a few threads claiming they earn x amount of money with no proof of earnings. I only do this with leaks, but even then, I admit, it is clickbait, and it should be against TOS altogether.
Without even looking far at all, I can find 10+ examples of methods that probably aren't even tested by the sellers claiming to earn $1000s a month, and somehow, with all this supposed money they're earning, they can't afford to buy Supreme 

Maybe there can be 2 sections in the method marketplace:
1. A marketplace for proven methods where the seller/method is clearly HQ, and each method must be accompanied by recent earning proofs. 
2. A marketplace for untested methods where earning proofs aren't required and method prices are limited to $100 USD and under

I believe this will:
- Raise the quality of methods in the marketplace
- Prevent members from losing money to LQ methods
- Allow HQ method sellers to earn more money by reducing competition in marketplace

Other ideas for HQ marketplace:
- A certain number of vouches must be earned to post there
- Sellers must guarantee a refund within a reasonable timeframe if users don't earn

General marketplace ideas (HQ marketplace & LQ marketplace)
- A rating system so people can see the method/seller/ebook ratings before purchasing methods
- Lying in a VC should be punishable

ROAD TO GODLIKE

LIKES 1677 / 2000 (83.8%)
REPUTATION 86 / 200 (43%)

PLEASE LEAVE A LIKE!

[39]

The problem is that you sell the Method, not the results.

[463]

The problem is that you sell the Method, not the results.

But people buy methods expecting to somewhat replicate the results of the seller. If the seller claims you can earn $1000 a week doing the method, but that claim is never proven, that's just false advertising

[794]

Redbul and udugahole both make point tbh there is "fake earnings" which can be seen as clickbait but also as redbul there is no way to predict customer result for same method because it's affected by various factors,

nonthless there should be more like "HQ methods" that are reviewed manually by admin and check if all earnings are true via a discord stream or smtg

Beware of Impersonators!

[343]

HQ

[39]

The problem is that you sell the Method, not the results.

But people buy methods expecting to somewhat replicate the results of the seller. If the seller claims you can earn $1000 a week doing the method, but that claim is never proven, that's just false advertising

yeah +1, but the problem like Kevin said is that someone will still end up making less than advertised on the method

but i fully agree with you that there should be some type of control regarding methods

[463]

This is a bump

[139]

+1

what about people selling old free content from the monetization techniques channel