PROBATION DISCUSSIONS 21 21

[comix4fun]

I feel for you but IMO (which means nothing here) this wasn't a board transaction so it he should not appear on the list. Are you out any monies? You sold it for 400 and he also gave you 400. I read like three threads on this one subject so I am confused.

 

 

So you don't think that this behavior, and the victimized party still being lied to, having to chase the guy down physically to get a partial refund back and having to go through the effort of selling the book to recoup some money and having this go on for TWO YEARS isn't something that every single person on this board should be warned about BEFORE dealing with this guy?

 

Let's be real for a second, probation list semantics aside, this type of action indicates dishonesty to an extreme and obvious degree. If someone who failed to pay for a $20 book because they changed their mind about it can go on the probation list then adding this guy is a no-brainer.

 

What are we trying to accomplish with the probation list? If we are trying to educate the users of this forum to real and tangible threats to their selling and buying activities then HOW CAN WE NOT INCLUDE HIM?

 

At this point I think it would border on negligence to NOT add him. We've got clear and convincing evidence of a real, actual act of dishonesty. Frankly, in my jurisdiction this amount of money would qualify as Felony Theft by Deception, so this isn't something to turn a blind eye towards. Failing to act on this endangers everyone who chooses to do business here.

 

[Speedy-D]

I feel for you but IMO (which means nothing here) this wasn't a board transaction so it he should not appear on the list. Are you out any monies? You sold it for 400 and he also gave you 400. I read like three threads on this one subject so I am confused.

 

 

So you don't think that this behavior, and the victimized party still being lied to, having to chase the guy down physically to get a partial refund back and having to go through the effort of selling the book to recoup some money and having this go on for TWO YEARS isn't something that every single person on this board should be warned about BEFORE dealing with this guy?

 

Let's be real for a second, probation list semantics aside, this type of action indicates dishonesty to an extreme and obvious degree. If someone who failed to pay for a $20 book because they changed their mind about it can go on the probation list then adding this guy is a no-brainer.

 

What are we trying to accomplish with the probation list? If we are trying to educate the users of this forum to real and tangible threats to their selling and buying activities then HOW CAN WE NOT INCLUDE HIM?

 

At this point I think it would border on negligence to NOT add him. We've got clear and convincing evidence of a real, actual act of dishonesty. Frankly, in my jurisdiction this amount of money would qualify as Felony Theft by Deception, so this isn't something to turn a blind eye towards. Failing to act on this endangers everyone who chooses to do business here.

I agree 100%. There's no reason to think things would go any more smoothly with in a boards transaction. People need to know what's in store for them if they deal with shady people, and where the shadiness occurs isn't always germane.

 

On that note, some offenses (like this one) seem egregious enough that making restitution doesn't seem sufficient to expunge the record. Even if Twisty gets his $400, the seller is still not to be trusted. Can we leave him on the Probies list? Or add him to the the HOS?

[N/A]

So you don't think that this behavior, and the victimized party still being lied to, having to chase the guy down physically to get a partial refund back and having to go through the effort of selling the book to recoup some money and having this go on for TWO YEARS isn't something that every single person on this board should be warned about BEFORE dealing with this guy?

Let's be real for a second, probation list semantics aside, this type of action indicates dishonesty to an extreme and obvious degree. If someone who failed to pay for a $20 book because they changed their mind about it can go on the probation list then adding this guy is a no-brainer.

What are we trying to accomplish with the probation list? If we are trying to educate the users of this forum to real and tangible threats to their selling and buying activities then HOW CAN WE NOT INCLUDE HIM?

At this point I think it would border on negligence to NOT add him. We've got clear and convincing evidence of a real, actual act of dishonesty. Frankly, in my jurisdiction this amount of money would qualify as Felony Theft by Deception, so this isn't something to turn a blind eye towards. Failing to act on this endangers everyone who chooses to do business here.

 

 

[nocutename]

He has been outed in three threads already. I am not going to debate this with you as there is no winning here. The probation list is for board transactions only. Once that rule is broken where do you draw the line. The list is meant for on board transaction that go astray.

 

I am not dismissing the atrocity of this behavior. But it was an off board transaction. The buyer should seek full refund or at least the dollars he is out.

 

I feel for you but IMO (which means nothing here) this wasn't a board transaction so it he should not appear on the list. Are you out any monies? You sold it for 400 and he also gave you 400. I read like three threads on this one subject so I am confused.

 

 

So you don't think that this behavior, and the victimized party still being lied to, having to chase the guy down physically to get a partial refund back and having to go through the effort of selling the book to recoup some money and having this go on for TWO YEARS isn't something that every single person on this board should be warned about BEFORE dealing with this guy?

 

Let's be real for a second, probation list semantics aside, this type of action indicates dishonesty to an extreme and obvious degree. If someone who failed to pay for a $20 book because they changed their mind about it can go on the probation list then adding this guy is a no-brainer.

 

What are we trying to accomplish with the probation list? If we are trying to educate the users of this forum to real and tangible threats to their selling and buying activities then HOW CAN WE NOT INCLUDE HIM?

 

At this point I think it would border on negligence to NOT add him. We've got clear and convincing evidence of a real, actual act of dishonesty. Frankly, in my jurisdiction this amount of money would qualify as Felony Theft by Deception, so this isn't something to turn a blind eye towards. Failing to act on this endangers everyone who chooses to do business here.

[Twistty1]

He has been outed in three threads already. I am not going to debate this with you as there is no winning here. The probation list is for board transactions only. Once that rule is broken where do you draw the line. The list is meant for on board transaction that go astray.

 

I am not dismissing the atrocity of this behavior. But it was an off board transaction. The buyer should seek full refund or at least the dollars he is out.

 

I feel for you but IMO (which means nothing here) this wasn't a board transaction so it he should not appear on the list. Are you out any monies? You sold it for 400 and he also gave you 400. I read like three threads on this one subject so I am confused.

 

 

So you don't think that this behavior, and the victimized party still being lied to, having to chase the guy down physically to get a partial refund back and having to go through the effort of selling the book to recoup some money and having this go on for TWO YEARS isn't something that every single person on this board should be warned about BEFORE dealing with this guy?

 

Let's be real for a second, probation list semantics aside, this type of action indicates dishonesty to an extreme and obvious degree. If someone who failed to pay for a $20 book because they changed their mind about it can go on the probation list then adding this guy is a no-brainer.

 

What are we trying to accomplish with the probation list? If we are trying to educate the users of this forum to real and tangible threats to their selling and buying activities then HOW CAN WE NOT INCLUDE HIM?

 

At this point I think it would border on negligence to NOT add him. We've got clear and convincing evidence of a real, actual act of dishonesty. Frankly, in my jurisdiction this amount of money would qualify as Felony Theft by Deception, so this isn't something to turn a blind eye towards. Failing to act on this endangers everyone who chooses to do business here.

 

How do you propose this be done as this has already gone on for over 2 years? I have had lawyers send him letters asking him to make good. The only way he paid any money was when he was given absolutely no other option but to do so. Now he has lied on the boards when confronted by myself and several other board member.

[Annihilus]

He has been outed in three threads already. I am not going to debate this with you as there is no winning here. The probation list is for board transactions only. Once that rule is broken where do you draw the line. The list is meant for on board transaction that go astray.

 

I am not dismissing the atrocity of this behavior. But it was an off board transaction. The buyer should seek full refund or at least the dollars he is out.

 

At this point I think it would border on negligence to NOT add him. We've got clear and convincing evidence of a real, actual act of dishonesty. Frankly, in my jurisdiction this amount of money would qualify as Felony Theft by Deception, so this isn't something to turn a blind eye towards. Failing to act on this endangers everyone who chooses to do business here.

 

I think we draw the line on a one to one basis as with all other transactions. I think I support adding him to the probation list for this one after hearing all the evidence. I'm certainly glad to know about it.

[Snake Eyes]

I think with the statements he made on board regarding the transaction, and Octobers conflicting information it has become a board issue. My inclination would be to place him on the probation list.

[Bio-Rupp]

Unless he's willing to give you all your money back... then you definatly have an issue.

 

If he goes on the probation list... then returns what he still owes you... it's not going to make him any more innocent... at least not in my eyes.

 

That said if he does return the money, you will be obliged to remove him from the probation list correct? Once he comes off the probation list, unfortunatly for him (& fortunatly for us), the deceit of his actions will still remain identified.

 

This seems like a HOS issue more than a probation issue... especially since his excuses were proven to be fabricated.

 

Long time boardies need to vote this one out.

 

 

[thehumantorch]

I feel for you but IMO (which means nothing here) this wasn't a board transaction so it he should not appear on the list. Are you out any monies? You sold it for 400 and he also gave you 400. I read like three threads on this one subject so I am confused.

 

 

So you don't think that this behavior, and the victimized party still being lied to, having to chase the guy down physically to get a partial refund back and having to go through the effort of selling the book to recoup some money and having this go on for TWO YEARS isn't something that every single person on this board should be warned about BEFORE dealing with this guy?

 

Let's be real for a second, probation list semantics aside, this type of action indicates dishonesty to an extreme and obvious degree. If someone who failed to pay for a $20 book because they changed their mind about it can go on the probation list then adding this guy is a no-brainer.

 

What are we trying to accomplish with the probation list? If we are trying to educate the users of this forum to real and tangible threats to their selling and buying activities then HOW CAN WE NOT INCLUDE HIM?

 

At this point I think it would border on negligence to NOT add him. We've got clear and convincing evidence of a real, actual act of dishonesty. Frankly, in my jurisdiction this amount of money would qualify as Felony Theft by Deception, so this isn't something to turn a blind eye towards. Failing to act on this endangers everyone who chooses to do business here.

 

Absolutely agree. Add him. Perhaps the transaction didn't happen on the boards

but he did lie on the boards about the transaction. That is enough for me.

 

Regardless, on my personal no buy list.

[oakman29]

I agree with it being more like a HOS than just your average probation.We police our little community to be a safe place to buy books,not to have to wait two years for a partial payback and deceit when confronted. My vote for the HOS.

[ashsaytr]

I agree with it being more like a HOS than just your average probation.We police our little community to be a safe place to buy books,not to have to wait two years for a partial payback and deceit when confronted. My vote for the HOS.

...and if not....he's on my do not buy from list!

[Comicopolis]

I agree with it being more like a HOS than just your average probation.We police our little community to be a safe place to buy books,not to have to wait two years for a partial payback and deceit when confronted. My vote for the HOS.

 

I concur.

[skypinkblu]

I can see the probation list, definitely.

1.These are 2 board members, I don't really care if the transaction on the boards or in a PM, or at the local bar.

 

It's obvious from October's statement that this was not an accident.

 

But I think Hall of Shame is not appropriate yet. Give him the chance to do the right thing and return the other $400.

 

If he doesn't, he stays on the list, forever.

 

.

[Speedy-D]

I can see the probation list, definitely.

1.These are 2 board members, I don't really care if the transaction on the boards or in a PM, or at the local bar.

 

It's obvious from October's statement that this was not an accident.

 

But I think Hall of Shame is not appropriate yet. Give him the chance to do the right thing and return the other $400.

 

If he doesn't, he stays on the list, forever.

 

.

He's had 2 years to deal with it though. And even if he does fork over the $400 under duress, it'll be no indication that he's trustworthy. This isn't a case of someone getting in over their head or being forgetful, all reports suggest that he was willfully deceptive. Isn't that what the HOS is for?

[october]

He belongs on the list, regardless of the on the board/off the board technicalities. The guy outright admitted to my FACE that he was going to sell the book as unrestored, right after I got finished telling him that the spine had been worked on.

 

Trust me, we do not need him around. I met him for a grand total of 15 minutes two years ago and I remember him vividly. The negative impression was that strong.

[comix4fun]

He belongs on the list, regardless of the on the board/off the board technicalities. The guy outright admitted to my FACE that he was going to sell the book as unrestored, right after I got finished telling him that the spine had been worked on.

 

Trust me, we do not need him around. I met him for a grand total of 15 minutes two years ago and I remember him vividly. The negative impression was that strong.

 

 

I was just about to mention that it was your statement and your account that changed this from a difference of opinion and a bad transaction to outright attempt to deceive, both at the time of sale and every encounter the buyer had with him since.

 

That's some chain of intentional deception.

[skypinkblu]

I can see the probation list, definitely.

1.These are 2 board members, I don't really care if the transaction on the boards or in a PM, or at the local bar.

 

It's obvious from October's statement that this was not an accident.

 

But I think Hall of Shame is not appropriate yet. Give him the chance to do the right thing and return the other $400.

 

If he doesn't, he stays on the list, forever.

 

.

He's had 2 years to deal with it though. And even if he does fork over the $400 under duress, it'll be no indication that he's trustworthy. This isn't a case of someone getting in over their head or being forgetful, all reports suggest that he was willfully deceptive. Isn't that what the HOS is for?

 

I don't doubt he'll never get off the probation list...and he's on my hall of slime list...however, the Hall of Shame was always for multiple transactions or HUGE transactions like that Batman 1.

If we toss every one on the Hall of Shame immediately, it loses something when you need to go to the next step.

 

Just how I view it. One is jail, the other is death row.

[Green]

I can see the probation list, definitely.

1.These are 2 board members, I don't really care if the transaction on the boards or in a PM, or at the local bar.

 

It's obvious from October's statement that this was not an accident.

 

But I think Hall of Shame is not appropriate yet. Give him the chance to do the right thing and return the other $400.

 

If he doesn't, he stays on the list, forever.

 

.

He's had 2 years to deal with it though. And even if he does fork over the $400 under duress, it'll be no indication that he's trustworthy. This isn't a case of someone getting in over their head or being forgetful, all reports suggest that he was willfully deceptive. Isn't that what the HOS is for?

 

I don't doubt he'll never get off the probation list...and he's on my hall of slime list...however, the Hall of Shame was always for multiple transactions or HUGE transactions like that Batman 1.

If we toss every one on the Hall of Shame immediately, it loses something when you need to go to the next step.

 

Just how I view it. One is jail, the other is death row.

I find your comments odd considering your crusade to put Jokerfish in the hos.

[skypinkblu]

I can see the probation list, definitely.

1.These are 2 board members, I don't really care if the transaction on the boards or in a PM, or at the local bar.

 

It's obvious from October's statement that this was not an accident.

 

But I think Hall of Shame is not appropriate yet. Give him the chance to do the right thing and return the other $400.

 

If he doesn't, he stays on the list, forever.

 

.

He's had 2 years to deal with it though. And even if he does fork over the $400 under duress, it'll be no indication that he's trustworthy. This isn't a case of someone getting in over their head or being forgetful, all reports suggest that he was willfully deceptive. Isn't that what the HOS is for?

 

I don't doubt he'll never get off the probation list...and he's on my hall of slime list...however, the Hall of Shame was always for multiple transactions or HUGE transactions like that Batman 1.

If we toss every one on the Hall of Shame immediately, it loses something when you need to go to the next step.

 

Just how I view it. One is jail, the other is death row.

I find your comments odd considering your crusade to put Jokerfish in the hos.

 

Jokerfish had more than 3 incidents.

 

I find your comments odd considering he's gotten into yet another incident and has proven yet again, he's not trustworthy...and yes, I know and understand you are friends

 

he might be a great guy in person, but he's a recidivist.

 

He just talked his way off the list again and again.

 

[mschmidt]

I can see the probation list, definitely.

1.These are 2 board members, I don't really care if the transaction on the boards or in a PM, or at the local bar.

 

It's obvious from October's statement that this was not an accident.

 

But I think Hall of Shame is not appropriate yet. Give him the chance to do the right thing and return the other $400.

 

If he doesn't, he stays on the list, forever.

 

.

He's had 2 years to deal with it though. And even if he does fork over the $400 under duress, it'll be no indication that he's trustworthy. This isn't a case of someone getting in over their head or being forgetful, all reports suggest that he was willfully deceptive. Isn't that what the HOS is for?

 

I don't doubt he'll never get off the probation list...and he's on my hall of slime list...however, the Hall of Shame was always for multiple transactions or HUGE transactions like that Batman 1.

If we toss every one on the Hall of Shame immediately, it loses something when you need to go to the next step.

 

Just how I view it. One is jail, the other is death row.

 

Wholeheartedly agree :thumbsup: