I don't have a dog in this fight either way, but I think it's not unreasonable for the people spending time running and moderating the auctions to need to add some sort of structure where they get a little compensation for their time. This isn't some kind of "fleece the community" cash grab on their part, but that seems to be how the "other" side is portraying it. My take is that there is a core group of sellers, who sell the max number of items every week, that the "fees" would most impact. It's not surprising that some of those people are the same ones moderating and pushing the new groups. I don't love the way the admins of 99 cent etc. phrased their post about this, but I get that they are trying to walk a line between heavily enforced fees, and a sort of honor system that sees the most active sellers supporting the administration of the group. I don't see any negative intentions there.
Anyone is free to create whatever groups they want obviously, but fragmenting the auction community into multiple groups with the same name and the same purpose seems like a loss for everyone. Confusion. Less eyes in one place. I already am not sure what group an item is posted in when it comes across my feed. Which "Bonsai Auctions" is it? Can I bid in the last minute and the order of bids matters? Oh no wait that is the other group that actually has different rules... What a mess. People *will* mess this up.
Frankly, the rules for the new groups seem much more complex and harder to administer, and as a frequent bidder, harder to understand. They need to be clear and concise, and they are not.
My 2 cents. I say all that having bought multiple items from several of the people forming these new groups.
Does anyone else feel that it's odd and spammy that several of the people in this thread pushing the new groups have been members on bnut for literally a few days? That alone leaves a bad taste in my mouth - to show up here with an agenda to push and make no attempt to actually be a part of this community first. Barf.