PROBATION DISCUSSIONS 21 21

[N/A]

I want to buy the book

 

You can't. I refuse to deal with you. You must go on the PL now for not buying the book.

 

But I want to buy the book.

 

You can't. Onto the list with you.

 

Sad.

 

Except that hasn't happened.

 

Nothing more than a technicality. But hey! Lawyer on!

[N/A]

the problem with this thread is that there are too many tag alongs like me trying to add their , which results in pages of pages of not explaining what the issue is.

 

And too much weed.

[HarveySwick]

Likely bcc just want to be reassured that he was right and Xela was wrong.

 

If it were me in bcc' shoes, that would be enough.

 

There's no real purpose to persue this further, since they buyer doesn't want the books and the seller no longer wants to sell to him.

 

In the end, the call is bcc's, but there's not much point to push this any further.

 

[bcc]

As I said before, if the purpose of nominating someone for the PL is to force a transaction to take place then I believe priorities are misplaced.

 

When I sell someone a book, I will take a return within a reasonable amount of time if the book is in the same condition for any reason. I've done it that way for 30 years; its just a business practice I believe in.

What is to stop Xela from going ahead and buying the books to stay off the list and then returning the books. And don't suggest he has to keep them no matter what; that's not right either.

 

I choose not to get into that possibility and I choose not to do business with someone who has been rude, dismissive, and disrespectful to me. Maybe in time people grow up and change their ways; but not today.

 

Either he deserves to be on the list or not for his actions, but don't put this back on me because I now won't sell to him. I just fail to believe that is what the spirit of the PL is all about. If it is then this whole this has been a waste of time and energy.

[N/A]

If you do not wish to pursue the transaction then I suggest you do not nominate him to the PL. It sets a terrible precedent to suggest a seller can decide how someone is removed from the PL arbitrarily because the buyer was rude.

 

I am sorry this happened to you and Xela has certainly sullied his reputation but neither of you wish to bring this to a conclusion.

 

The PL is not to force a transaction but allow the community to back those who are playing by the rules and avoid those who are not.

 

Xela was rude. He acted in appropriately and you were right. Time to move on.

[jaybuck43]

Did something just go poof?

[N/A]

Don't think so but my memory is mess.

[comix4fun]

I wonder if we can make the list big enough that they have their own sales section?

 

 

 

Isn't that sort of like the way Australia was used by the Brits originally?

[BlowUpTheMoon]

I wonder if we can make the list big enough that they have their own sales section?

 

 

 

Isn't that sort of like the way Australia was used by the Brits originally?

 

[MetalPSI]

Well, that's 151 posts I skimmed over quickly. Maybe I will know what's going on sub consciously.

 

Anyways...what happened?

 

Someone berate someone else for accusing someone of being a mob mentalist while another person makes a statement about something and no one agrees, but everyone agrees to disagree?

[Duffman_Comics]

I wonder if we can make the list big enough that they have their own sales section?

 

 

 

Isn't that sort of like the way Australia was used by the Brits originally?

 

[jsilverjanet]

$493-$475=$18

 

I'm not sure why $18 difference was enough for the buyer to break the deal. Seems odd especially when spending that amount of money on books, you'd want the safest most secure way of shipping

 

 

[slym2none]

No popcorn for you!

 

 

 

 

 

-slym

[Dr. Love]

For some reason I can't keep my hands off this one.

 

I agree with ed and crassus, except I'd take it a step further. With all due respect to the seller, and considering the context at the time, saying "Let me know if that is what you want to do" can only be reasonably taken to be a release. These are magic words. Fully as unconditional and consequential as "I'll take it". The seller didn't need to say that - with the credit, he was coming in under the low end of his shipping quote, which of course had been accepted. But he did.

 

And he should have. The release was the right thing, the smart thing to do. If your pricing could be considered aggressive, however warranted in your mind, and your buyer after a number of days to stew is squealing about anything...then give them a chance to walk or re-commit to the deal. In my mind that's what the second LMK was all about. It could be argued that this LMK was clearly in relation to the 3 shipping options and not the deal as a whole. But a reasonable person would have to admit that the buyer, lacking any specific language to the contrary, could see that as affirming the original release statement. And the buyer politely thanked the seller and passed. And then things went south.

 

I think we all agree that this was not the most honorable choice by the buyer. He had agreed to a price not to exceed $510. The price was less. He should have concluded the deal. I've made deals I regret later, we all have. You can take it as yet another lesson to reflect more before agreeing, or get humble and ask for permission to break the deal. And then the ignoring, the removal from the thread, the later, these were not wise choices.

 

I think both parties have some responsibility for this breakdown, and it would be great if they apologized to each other for their own part in this unfortunate incident. They both have good reputations and appear to be good geeks. If we all just brought our grievances to Sharon first and followed her advice...what a wonderful world this would be!

[thirdgreenham]

For some reason I can't keep my hands off this one.

 

I agree with ed and crassus, except I'd take it a step further. With all due respect to the seller, and considering the context at the time, saying "Let me know if that is what you want to do" can only be reasonably taken to be a release. These are magic words. Fully as unconditional and consequential as "I'll take it". The seller didn't need to say that - with the credit, he was coming in under the low end of his shipping quote, which of course had been accepted. But he did.

 

And he should have. The release was the right thing, the smart thing to do. If your pricing could be considered aggressive, however warranted in your mind, and your buyer after a number of days to stew is squealing about anything...then give them a chance to walk or re-commit to the deal. In my mind that's what the second LMK was all about. It could be argued that this LMK was clearly in relation to the 3 shipping options and not the deal as a whole. But a reasonable person would have to admit that the buyer, lacking any specific language to the contrary, could see that as affirming the original release statement. And the buyer politely thanked the seller and passed. And then things went south.

 

I think we all agree that this was not the most honorable choice by the buyer. He had agreed to a price not to exceed $510. The price was less. He should have concluded the deal. I've made deals I regret later, we all have. You can take it as yet another lesson to reflect more before agreeing, or get humble and ask for permission to break the deal. And then the ignoring, the removal from the thread, the later, these were not wise choices.

 

I think both parties have some responsibility for this breakdown, and it would be great if they apologized to each other for their own part in this unfortunate incident. They both have good reputations and appear to be good geeks. If we all just brought our grievances to Sharon first and followed her advice...what a wonderful world this would be!

 

A few things:

 

Yes, the LMK line most certainly seemed like asking if he wanted to back out of this deal, and actually, very likely might be the reason we're discussing this right now.

 

The buyer actually agreed to paying no more than $480-490 ($450 plus $50-60, less $20). It didn't make sense for the seller to come at him for $3 more than what he quoted, just because he didn't want to eat another 3 extra dollars.

 

That, and his LMK wording, basically allowed this to fall apart.

 

Xela could have still taken a cheaper shipping option, I know I would have. And he could have been paying $11 for shipping instead of $43. So, he's still a righteous noob for not following through with his commitment to buy these books.

 

Going forward, bcc should also be careful of his wording. After a deal is struck, no more "Let me know if that is what you want to do" lines. Also, no more don't tell the guy $30-40 for shipping and then ask for $43.

 

-Andy

[jaybuck43]

Given the context, I read the let me know what you want to do in regards to the shipping option not about the deal in general. It was "hey going with the shipping option I selected it'll be 43 dollars, let me know if that is OK with you or if you want me to price a different option"

[thirdgreenham]

That's likely what bcc was thinking, yes. Just a poor choice in wording for a buyer who was apparently on the edge of not doing this deal.

[Comicopolis]

I wonder if we can make the list big enough that they have their own sales section?

 

 

 

Isn't that sort of like the way Australia was used by the Brits originally?

 

And the US.

 

British Convicts Shipped to American Colonies

[Jeffro.]

I wonder if we can make the list big enough that they have their own sales section?

 

 

 

Isn't that sort of like the way Australia was used by the Brits originally?

 

And the US.

 

British Convicts Shipped to American Colonies

 

Can we send some back? Seems only fair

[chrisco37]

It's your avatar, Mumm-ra.

 

Being back the upside down bat face image.

 

I wish I could remember what book that was. Ity wasn;t a bat but some kind of weird marsupial as I recall. But that was pre-code and for now, I am in the Pre-Hero Marvel/Atlas pst-code sci-fi realm. I must be true.

 

TTA#31