PROBATION DISCUSSIONS 21 21

[CAHokie]

Apparently the letter of the rules are much more important than the actual spirit of them.

[A.Romeo]

I think anybody guilty of outright intentional deception, especially when they refuse to admit it, accept any responsibility or given any indication of remorse or any inclination to change, don't need to be here.

 

Im no saint, but I cant imagine lying that big (fake pictures), and if I did and got nabbed, I'd expect it to be curtains for me.

 

There are honest mistakes, mistakes out of desperation, and then just outright deception.

I agree 100% He is a cancer. To me I feel like our members are a cut above the average collector. If we allow a person to do the things he does,we are just opening the door for anyone else who wants to come here and try the same scams,lies etc.

 

Agreed which is why if your a known repeat offender of being on and off the PL, other members should be allowed to fill a sales thread letting others know who they are dealing with and what they may be getting into. For honest sellers, they have nothing to worry about, its the ones who have a problem with this that are the ones I would question and be wary of

[Hado]

One member is allowed to post a message in a sales thread that the seller is on the P/L or HOS.

 

That should let buyers know they need to do some research. You don't need to flood their sales threads to keep people safe.

[A.Romeo]

One member is allowed to post a message in a sales thread that the seller is on the P/L or HOS.

 

That should let buyers know they need to do some research. You don't need to flood their sales threads to keep people safe.

 

I'm ok with someone posting once in a sales thread to warn others.

 

In a repeat offender case I would say even if they currently aren't on a list, there should be allowed to be one post made that the person has been on the list more than once.

[PovertyRow]

Not a reply to Oakman but a reply in general.

 

I hear things like the letter of the law is more important than the spirit of the law. That actually makes no sense. Without the letter of the law there would BE no law. And if the spirit overrides the letter then a precedent has been set which, as I sometimes have expressed over the years, is disturbing.

 

I and others have asked a simple thing: please produce some documentation beyond a comment made in a charity thread about lowballing or a "if you don't read this you are homosexual" on an ebay post or a sociology 101 comment about someone else. I asked for that early on when I quoted Harvey's nomination poll.

 

Unless I missed these in all the past posts no one has, but I think one or two said they would look for them.

 

Please post any unresolved issues here. I would be happy to make the HOS poll myself based on them and have no problem including the PL issue with the "borrowed" cracked case image and subsequent reneging on a deal.

 

So, any unresolved issues? Any money due or taken? Anything that goes beyond speculation as to motive is welcome..

[wombat]

Isn't someone due a comic?

[Hado]

Not a reply to Oakman but a reply in general.

 

I hear things like the letter of the law is more important than the spirit of the law. That actually makes no sense. Without the letter of the law there would BE no law. And if the spirit overrides the letter then a precedent has been set which, as I sometimes have expressed over the years, is disturbing.

 

I and others have asked a simple thing: please produce some documentation beyond a comment made in a charity thread about lowballing or a "if you don't read this you are homosexual" on an ebay post or a sociology 101 comment about someone else. I asked for that early on when I quoted Harvey's nomination poll.

 

Unless I missed these in all the past posts no one has, but I think one or two said they would look for them.

 

Please post any unresolved issues here. I would be happy to make the HOS poll myself based on them and have no problem including the PL issue with the "borrowed" cracked case image and subsequent reneging on a deal.

 

So, any unresolved issues? Any money due or taken? Anything that goes beyond speculation as to motive is welcome..

I think that was Hokie, not Oak.

[PovertyRow]

Isn't someone due a comic?

 

That's the kind of thing I am asking about.

 

BTW - I tracked down the cracked case image and it is from a post by Kaptain Kollektor. I haven't found anything in the Probie Discussions but using that image without permission to deceive another itself is a separate incident involving a second board member.

 

In my mind that one offense is actually two involving two board members. I'd hope KK expresses himself on that.

[PovertyRow]

Not a reply to Oakman but a reply in general.

 

I hear things like the letter of the law is more important than the spirit of the law. That actually makes no sense. Without the letter of the law there would BE no law. And if the spirit overrides the letter then a precedent has been set which, as I sometimes have expressed over the years, is disturbing.

 

I and others have asked a simple thing: please produce some documentation beyond a comment made in a charity thread about lowballing or a "if you don't read this you are homosexual" on an ebay post or a sociology 101 comment about someone else. I asked for that early on when I quoted Harvey's nomination poll.

 

Unless I missed these in all the past posts no one has, but I think one or two said they would look for them.

 

Please post any unresolved issues here. I would be happy to make the HOS poll myself based on them and have no problem including the PL issue with the "borrowed" cracked case image and subsequent reneging on a deal.

 

So, any unresolved issues? Any money due or taken? Anything that goes beyond speculation as to motive is welcome..

I think that was Hokie, not Oak.

 

Thanks but did you read my first sentence.

[bababooey]

Not a reply to Oakman but a reply in general.

 

I hear things like the letter of the law is more important than the spirit of the law. That actually makes no sense. Without the letter of the law there would BE no law. And if the spirit overrides the letter then a precedent has been set which, as I sometimes have expressed over the years, is disturbing.

 

I and others have asked a simple thing: please produce some documentation beyond a comment made in a charity thread about lowballing or a "if you don't read this you are homosexual" on an ebay post or a sociology 101 comment about someone else. I asked for that early on when I quoted Harvey's nomination poll.

 

Unless I missed these in all the past posts no one has, but I think one or two said they would look for them.

 

Please post any unresolved issues here. I would be happy to make the HOS poll myself based on them and have no problem including the PL issue with the "borrowed" cracked case image and subsequent reneging on a deal.

 

So, any unresolved issues? Any money due or taken? Anything that goes beyond speculation as to motive is welcome..

I think that was Hokie, not Oak.

 

Thanks but did you read my first sentence.

Yes I did. Oh sorry are you talking to Oak or Hado?

[CAHokie]

Not a reply to Oakman but a reply in general.

 

I hear things like the letter of the law is more important than the spirit of the law. That actually makes no sense. Without the letter of the law there would BE no law. And if the spirit overrides the letter then a precedent has been set which, as I sometimes have expressed over the years, is disturbing.

 

I and others have asked a simple thing: please produce some documentation beyond a comment made in a charity thread about lowballing or a "if you don't read this you are homosexual" on an ebay post or a sociology 101 comment about someone else. I asked for that early on when I quoted Harvey's nomination poll.

 

Unless I missed these in all the past posts no one has, but I think one or two said they would look for them.

 

Please post any unresolved issues here. I would be happy to make the HOS poll myself based on them and have no problem including the PL issue with the "borrowed" cracked case image and subsequent reneging on a deal.

 

So, any unresolved issues? Any money due or taken? Anything that goes beyond speculation as to motive is welcome..

 

It may have not been for Oakman but it was most likely for me. I know that you are very familiar with the spirit vs letter of the law analogy. Otherwise, I hope if you ever get a ticket for going 36 in a 35 zone, you sign it with a smile. As much as some enjoy enforcing these rules the same as if they were in a courtroom, utilizing loopholes and "lack of evidence" as reasons to not enforce them is almost amusing. Almost. Some stuff can't be proven to the level of courtroom requirements, because no one has the ability to write search warrants for online documentation. Obviously, it is a chatboard and not a legal matter which would mean that the intentions of the rules written is the most important part. It does not take much common sense to see when a scammer is a scammer or on the flip side, when someone made a mistake. Yes, there will be some right in the middle, but usually it is not that hard to see.

[Hado]

One member is allowed to post a message in a sales thread that the seller is on the P/L or HOS.

 

That should let buyers know they need to do some research. You don't need to flood their sales threads to keep people safe.

 

I'm ok with someone posting once in a sales thread to warn others.

 

In a repeat offender case I would say even if they currently aren't on a list, there should be allowed to be one post made that the person has been on the list more than once.

Like a warning that the seller has had numerous deals have snags.

 

Interesting.

 

What if someone had a few PL appearances, but then learned what is expected of them an cleaned up their act, would it still be necessary for the warning to be issued?

[Hado]

Not a reply to Oakman but a reply in general.

 

I hear things like the letter of the law is more important than the spirit of the law. That actually makes no sense. Without the letter of the law there would BE no law. And if the spirit overrides the letter then a precedent has been set which, as I sometimes have expressed over the years, is disturbing.

 

I and others have asked a simple thing: please produce some documentation beyond a comment made in a charity thread about lowballing or a "if you don't read this you are homosexual" on an ebay post or a sociology 101 comment about someone else. I asked for that early on when I quoted Harvey's nomination poll.

 

Unless I missed these in all the past posts no one has, but I think one or two said they would look for them.

 

Please post any unresolved issues here. I would be happy to make the HOS poll myself based on them and have no problem including the PL issue with the "borrowed" cracked case image and subsequent reneging on a deal.

 

So, any unresolved issues? Any money due or taken? Anything that goes beyond speculation as to motive is welcome..

I think that was Hokie, not Oak.

 

Thanks but did you read my first sentence.

Yes I did. Oh sorry are you talking to Oak or Hado?

Yeah, just being a stickler, don't want Oak on a list in Hokies spot

[CAHokie]

Oh no! Am I on someone's list now??

[Hado]

Oh no! Am I on someone's list now??

 

Wait, aren't you already on the list of 'Harvey's Henchmen'?

[A.Romeo]

One member is allowed to post a message in a sales thread that the seller is on the P/L or HOS.

 

That should let buyers know they need to do some research. You don't need to flood their sales threads to keep people safe.

 

I'm ok with someone posting once in a sales thread to warn others.

 

In a repeat offender case I would say even if they currently aren't on a list, there should be allowed to be one post made that the person has been on the list more than once.

Like a warning that the seller has had numerous deals have snags.

 

Interesting.

 

What if someone had a few PL appearances, but then learned what is expected of them an cleaned up their act, would it still be necessary for the warning to be issued?

 

That's a tough call because if you put a time limit on it the scam artist could just lay low for a few months until they outside the probation period. I think if your on more than once its free game forever. You don't get into business transactions unless you can complete said transactions plain and simple. With only having a Kudos thread where you can't put negative feedback how else can people be made aware that this person has a history. Especially if their name isn't on the PL or HOS list at the time. It's way to easy for scammers to get away with things on here with the current rules.

[CAHokie]

Oh no! Am I on someone's list now??

 

Wait, aren't you already on the list of 'Harvey's Henchmen'?

 

I am?!?

 

 

I honestly didn't know that. He is my bud, but he will be the first to tell you that I argue with him more than just about anyone on the boards.

[jsilverjanet]

Never seen anything wrong with having a little loyalty to your friends. I think we've all been guilty of that.

[Awax]

Never seen anything wrong with having a little loyalty to your friends. I think we've all been guilty of that.

 

[Hado]

One member is allowed to post a message in a sales thread that the seller is on the P/L or HOS.

 

That should let buyers know they need to do some research. You don't need to flood their sales threads to keep people safe.

 

I'm ok with someone posting once in a sales thread to warn others.

 

In a repeat offender case I would say even if they currently aren't on a list, there should be allowed to be one post made that the person has been on the list more than once.

Like a warning that the seller has had numerous deals have snags.

 

Interesting.

 

What if someone had a few PL appearances, but then learned what is expected of them an cleaned up their act, would it still be necessary for the warning to be issued?

 

That's a tough call because if you put a time limit on it the scam artist could just lay low for a few months until they outside the probation period. I think if your on more than once its free game forever. You don't get into business transactions unless you can complete said transactions plain and simple. With only having a Kudos thread where you can't put negative feedback how else can people be made aware that this person has a history. Especially if their name isn't on the PL or HOS list at the time. It's way to easy for scammers to get away with things on here with the current rules.

Forevers a long time.

 

So my first two sales threads, just say I'm tardy on shipping, then a book isn't as described and I find myself on the PL twice. I make good and remove myself from the list, then have several years with stellar sales and no issues whatsoever.

 

If someone doesn't like me, they can post in my sales threads I was a repeat offender on the PL?