PROBATION DISCUSSIONS 21 21

[joe_collector]

No. The nomination would not be supported.

 

Who cares, as according to Harvey, with no one in charge, there is effectively no way to stop these PL nominations.

 

Otherwise, post the names of those who get an official vote on the PL list.

 

There is no vote

There is no vote

There is no vote

 

Just so you can ask again....there is no vote.

 

So Harry was right, and you were wrong, with no official vote there is no official way to keep someone off the PL.

[comix4fun]

There's also the issue of looking at the attitude of the offending parties and not the transgression itself.

 

 

 

In the interest of full understanding don't you have to look into the offending party's words, actions and overall attitudes to determine what his actual intentions were?

 

The action of immediately listing the book on Ebay speaks volumes to whether or not he actually meant to "hold onto" the book.

 

I think ignoring facts that are laid before us is a mistake. Although, if I were the buyer in this scenario I would simply learn from what the seller chose to show me and be pleased that I didn't complete a transaction with him.

[Sqeggs]

A couple of observations:

 

1. I'm a one-note Charlie on this, but the key problem is that there is no way short of a PL nomination to flag misbehavior by a buyer or seller. So someone who feels ill-used has no way to vent short of a PL nomination, which in some cases -- and I think this case is one -- is too stiff a penalty.

 

2. I would say when any nomination gets to the point of parsing the meaning of statements and the exact timelines involved, that nomination should be thrown out. We can't expect perfect behavior from either buyers or sellers. Imo, the PL should be reserved for clear cut cases of misbehavior.

[bababooey]

No. The nomination would not be supported.

 

Who cares, as according to Harvey, with no one in charge, there is effectively no way to stop these PL nominations.

 

Otherwise, post the names of those who get an official vote on the PL list.

 

There is no vote

There is no vote

There is no vote

 

Just so you can ask again....there is no vote.

 

So Harry was right, and you were wrong, with no official vote there is no official way to keep someone off the PL.

In most cases, people aren't added unless there is a clear victim/villain......I don't agree that a nomination creates an inevitable nominee/addition to the list.

 

Maybe for borderline cases, where people on both sides "agree to disagree" but there is no clear majority, we should create a voting process - it probably makes sense for everyone other than the parties involved to stay quiet & allow the nominee & nominator to explain their points of view in this thread.

 

This is very true in cases where someone, other than the victim, "appears to" have a desire to see someone added to the PL.

 

 

So we have this To be fair.... post on May 1st 11:52 pm

 

To be fair, he did say in PM he thought the book was underpriced and he thought he may keep it. I got caught up in some other things, and then fell asleep, woke up and sent a PM agreeing to what he was asking for the book ($10 more than offered) in a PM and posted I'll take it in his open, and still open listing/board post. To me if he was keeping it to sell on Ebay he should have closed it and/or responded to my PM. I don't know it's been a frustrating week but tomorrow is another day.

 

Then on May 2 @ 1:06 pm Branget grabs the wheel... to press forward the PL nomination.

 

Since Oceanavekid does not wish to fulfill his obligation as a seller I am nominating him for the probation list. The 30 days no longer applies since he has refused to proceed. A PM has been sent outlining the nomination and includes Jawn. I assume Jawn needs to post here to start the clock.

If you read further on the second link, two posts later you'll see a Swick quote where the nominee didn't deny his intent to sell for a higher amount & why he was doing it.

 

[N/A]

No. The nomination would not be supported.

 

Who cares, as according to Harvey, with no one in charge, there is effectively no way to stop these PL nominations.

 

Otherwise, post the names of those who get an official vote on the PL list.

 

There is no vote

There is no vote

There is no vote

 

Just so you can ask again....there is no vote.

 

So Harry was right, and you were wrong, with no official vote there is no official way to keep someone off the PL.

 

Discussion.

[comix4fun]

A couple of observations:

 

1. I'm a one-note Charlie on this, but the key problem is that there is no way short of a PL nomination to flag misbehavior by a buyer or seller. So someone who feels ill-used has no way to vent short of a PL nomination, which in some cases -- and I think this case is one -- is too stiff a penalty.

 

2. I would say when any nomination gets to the point of parsing the meaning of statements and the exact timelines involved, that nomination should be thrown out. We can't expect perfect behavior from either buyers or sellers. Imo, the PL should be reserved for clear cut cases of misbehavior.

 

 

 

I see what you're saying.

 

One problem is, there are people that I know must be reading this thread who have no problem playing word games with their threads and sales to create enough fog that if something goes wrong they are in the clear.

 

I'd still like to hear about it when stuff like this goes down and make the call on a one by one basis, just to get all that information out there so others can learn from it if nothing else.

[N/A]

No. The nomination would not be supported.

 

Who cares, as according to Harvey, with no one in charge, there is effectively no way to stop these PL nominations.

 

Otherwise, post the names of those who get an official vote on the PL list.

 

There is no vote

There is no vote

There is no vote

 

Just so you can ask again....there is no vote.

 

So Harry was right, and you were wrong, with no official vote there is no official way to keep someone off the PL.

In most cases, people aren't added unless there is a clear victim/villain......I don't agree that a nomination creates an inevitable nominee/addition to the list.

 

Maybe for borderline cases, where people on both sides "agree to disagree" but there is no clear majority, we should create a voting process - it probably makes sense for everyone other than the parties involved to stay quiet & allow the nominee & nominator to explain their points of view in this thread.

 

This is very true in cases where someone, other than the victim, "appears to" have a desire to see someone added to the PL.

 

 

So we have this To be fair.... post on May 1st 11:52 pm

 

To be fair, he did say in PM he thought the book was underpriced and he thought he may keep it. I got caught up in some other things, and then fell asleep, woke up and sent a PM agreeing to what he was asking for the book ($10 more than offered) in a PM and posted I'll take it in his open, and still open listing/board post. To me if he was keeping it to sell on Ebay he should have closed it and/or responded to my PM. I don't know it's been a frustrating week but tomorrow is another day.

 

Then on May 2 @ 1:06 pm Branget grabs the wheel... to press forward the PL nomination.

 

Since Oceanavekid does not wish to fulfill his obligation as a seller I am nominating him for the probation list. The 30 days no longer applies since he has refused to proceed. A PM has been sent outlining the nomination and includes Jawn. I assume Jawn needs to post here to start the clock.

If you read further on the second link, two posts later you'll see a Swick quote where the nominee didn't deny his intent to sell for a higher amount & why he was doing it.

 

What a wheel grabber.

[comix4fun]

No. The nomination would not be supported.

 

Who cares, as according to Harvey, with no one in charge, there is effectively no way to stop these PL nominations.

 

Otherwise, post the names of those who get an official vote on the PL list.

 

There is no vote

There is no vote

There is no vote

 

Just so you can ask again....there is no vote.

 

So Harry was right, and you were wrong, with no official vote there is no official way to keep someone off the PL.

In most cases, people aren't added unless there is a clear victim/villain......I don't agree that a nomination creates an inevitable nominee/addition to the list.

 

Maybe for borderline cases, where people on both sides "agree to disagree" but there is no clear majority, we should create a voting process - it probably makes sense for everyone other than the parties involved to stay quiet & allow the nominee & nominator to explain their points of view in this thread.

 

This is very true in cases where someone, other than the victim, "appears to" have a desire to see someone added to the PL.

 

 

So we have this To be fair.... post on May 1st 11:52 pm

 

To be fair, he did say in PM he thought the book was underpriced and he thought he may keep it. I got caught up in some other things, and then fell asleep, woke up and sent a PM agreeing to what he was asking for the book ($10 more than offered) in a PM and posted I'll take it in his open, and still open listing/board post. To me if he was keeping it to sell on Ebay he should have closed it and/or responded to my PM. I don't know it's been a frustrating week but tomorrow is another day.

 

Then on May 2 @ 1:06 pm Branget grabs the wheel... to press forward the PL nomination.

 

Since Oceanavekid does not wish to fulfill his obligation as a seller I am nominating him for the probation list. The 30 days no longer applies since he has refused to proceed. A PM has been sent outlining the nomination and includes Jawn. I assume Jawn needs to post here to start the clock.

If you read further on the second link, two posts later you'll see a Swick quote where the nominee didn't deny his intent to sell for a higher amount & why he was doing it.

 

What a wheel grabber.

 

 

At least it's just the wheel and not the stick shift.

[comix4fun]

In looking back at this I seem to remember a lot of frustration over repeated listing violations by the seller that preceded this latest...ummm....miscommunication....I have a feeling that the totality of perceived actions, issues, and problems were taken into account as diminishing the innocence of the "misunderstanding" between the parties, and did not allow for the benefit of the doubt that would be expected for someone that didn't have several threads moved, deleted, etc. prior to this incident.

 

 

[bababooey]

In looking back at this I seem to remember a lot of frustration over repeated listing violations by the seller that preceded this latest...ummm....miscommunication....I have a feeling that the totality of perceived actions, issues, and problems were taken into account as diminishing the innocence of the "misunderstanding" between the parties, and did not allow for the benefit of the doubt that would be expected for someone that didn't have several threads moved, deleted, etc. prior to this incident.

 

That's possible & that appears to be why many are against him on this.

I don't follow the modern sales boards much - they all look the same to me -

I only post in the modern section to be a disruptive presence.

 

 

[comix4fun]

In looking back at this I seem to remember a lot of frustration over repeated listing violations by the seller that preceded this latest...ummm....miscommunication....I have a feeling that the totality of perceived actions, issues, and problems were taken into account as diminishing the innocence of the "misunderstanding" between the parties, and did not allow for the benefit of the doubt that would be expected for someone that didn't have several threads moved, deleted, etc. prior to this incident.

 

That's possible & that appears to be why many are against him on this.

I don't follow the modern sales boards much - they all look the same to me -

I only post in the modern section to be a disruptive presence.

 

 

[divad]

Actually I am still around and taking a more active part again. I know the Ocean situation was a bit weird so please correct me if I am wrong.

 

After saying he thought he'd keep the book the sales thread remained up for several days with a $110 price on the book. Is that correct?

 

 

 

 

 

 

I have missed you, Michael...

 

Ocean is what? 12? all.

[bababooey]

* correction - I do like comicopolis' modern marvel reader thread

[divad]

Now the PGM thread is getting just as weird . . . simple is always better. Always.

[joe_collector]

Branget grabs the wheel...to press forward the PL nomination.

 

I read the entire thread, and it's pretty obvious that Branget dislikes Ocean and used the situation to his advantage.

 

This scenario is like the judge rounding up a suspect before the police even have a chance of getting the victim to file a complaint.

[joe_collector]

In looking back at this I seem to remember a lot of frustration over repeated listing violations by the seller that preceded this latest...ummm....miscommunication....I have a feeling that the totality of perceived actions, issues, and problems were taken into account as diminishing the innocence of the "misunderstanding" between the parties, and did not allow for the benefit of the doubt that would be expected for someone that didn't have several threads moved, deleted, etc. prior to this incident.

 

Hey, I'm not supporting the previous actions of Ocean, as he's a major spoon, but we're supposed to look at this individual PL case and decide based on that, not whether he pizzed in your corn flakes 2 weeks prior.

 

Ocean is a jerk, no doubt about it, but if we only allowed perfect forumites to sell, the Marketplace would dry up pretty quick, so I'm only looking if he deserves the PL based on this specific instance, and I just don't see it. Maybe he did deserve it for all his cross-post sales threads, but no one nominated him for that.

 

It's just a witch hunt designed to get rid of a forum member that some on here *cough* Branget *cough* want to get rid of.

[N/A]

Branget grabs the wheel...to press forward the PL nomination.

 

I read the entire thread, and it's pretty obvious that Branget dislikes Ocean and used the situation to his advantage.

 

This scenario is like the judge rounding up a suspect before the police even have a chance of getting the victim to file a complaint.

 

 

No.

[N/A]

In looking back at this I seem to remember a lot of frustration over repeated listing violations by the seller that preceded this latest...ummm....miscommunication....I have a feeling that the totality of perceived actions, issues, and problems were taken into account as diminishing the innocence of the "misunderstanding" between the parties, and did not allow for the benefit of the doubt that would be expected for someone that didn't have several threads moved, deleted, etc. prior to this incident.

 

Hey, I'm not supporting the previous actions of Ocean, as he's a major spoon, but we're supposed to look at this individual PL case and decide based on that, not whether he pizzed in your corn flakes 2 weeks prior.

 

Ocean is a jerk, no doubt about it, but if we only allowed perfect forumites to sell, the Marketplace would dry up pretty quick, so I'm only looking if he deserves the PL based on this specific instance, and I just don't see it. Maybe he did deserve it for all his cross-post sales threads, but no one nominated him for that.

 

It's just a witch hunt designed to get rid of a forum member that some on here *cough* Branget *cough* want to get rid of.

 

You couldn't be further from the truth but hey make it personal. It is what you do.

[comix4fun]

In looking back at this I seem to remember a lot of frustration over repeated listing violations by the seller that preceded this latest...ummm....miscommunication....I have a feeling that the totality of perceived actions, issues, and problems were taken into account as diminishing the innocence of the "misunderstanding" between the parties, and did not allow for the benefit of the doubt that would be expected for someone that didn't have several threads moved, deleted, etc. prior to this incident.

 

Hey, I'm not supporting the previous actions of Ocean, as he's a major spoon, but we're supposed to look at this individual PL case and decide based on that, not whether he pizzed in your corn flakes 2 weeks prior.

 

Ocean is a jerk, no doubt about it, but if we only allowed perfect forumites to sell, the Marketplace would dry up pretty quick, so I'm only looking if he deserves the PL based on this specific instance, and I just don't see it. Maybe he did deserve it for all his cross-post sales threads, but no one nominated him for that.

 

It's just a witch hunt designed to get rid of a forum member that some on here *cough* Branget *cough* want to get rid of.

 

 

Oh I know you weren't supporting him. I didn't mean to make it sound like you were. I was just trying to figure out where the short fuse came from with him from the community in general. I couldn't remember exactly except for a general feeling of annoyance at the poster.

[joe_collector]

You couldn't be further from the truth but hey make it personal. It is what you do.

 

So you are refuting the documented statement that you initiated the PL nomination process well in advance of the buyer?

 

Is that even allowed? I thought the affected party had to formally start the process, and 3rd-party witch hunts were not allowed?

 

Again, I am in no way supporting Ocean, just the integrity of the PL process for us all.

 

I'd hate to start a sales thread, misplace a book that was later BIN'd by a dickwad buyer I already told via PM that it was no longer available, and suddenly find myself on the PL list.